Channel
@woozyintel
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Polls · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
1,676subscribers
-30 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1002529238952 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @woozyintel |
| Created | Between 1 March 2025 and 31 July 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/woozyintel |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 20:04 | 1,676 | -15 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 19:51 | 1,691 | -14 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 06:21 | 1,705 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 04:48 | 1,706 | first reading |
23 posts held, back to 4 August 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 22 of 23 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 23 (4 August 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 4,194 |
| Reactions total | 241 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 17:42 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
241 reactions across 22 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 38.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| custom 5319217842481013291 | 92 | 38.2% | |
| 🗿 | 51 | 21.2% | |
| custom 5343819952023428595 | 42 | 17.4% | |
| 😭 | 33 | 13.7% | |
| custom 5334917580035468337 | 18 | 7.47% | |
| custom 5319299223521338293 | 5 | 2.07% |
Custom emoji. 4 of the rows above are Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The counts beside them areTelegram’s.
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 22 of the 23 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 241reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 7 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @woozyintel. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 23 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 4 August 2026 to 7 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
very absurd scene in the trenches today, read what’s happening on sol chain cuz these ngas are officially losing it: https://x.com/woozy_sol/status/2085765917103866213?s=46
🗿4custom 53438199520234285951
feeling left behind? size artcoin your barber messed you up? size artcoin she left you on read? size artcoin mom told you to get a job? size artcoin can’t sleep? size artcoin coffee this morning tasted like ass? size artcoin your friends think your delusional? size artcoin still coping you missed the biggest sol runner of the cycle, fartcoin? wait until you realise you missed artcoin as well size. $Artcoin.
custom 53192178424810132919🗿2custom 53438199520234285951
one robinhood play im really disappointed with not sharing here is $INTERN i had some insider info when this firstly came out and i took like 1% at 160K and traded it few times, made like 5,6K in total rotating it but i wasn’t sure how good it is because its not an attention coin but more of a community coin with no much catalysts, so the only way it can send is by them getting in people and having connections and a…
custom 53192178424810132916🗿1custom 53438199520234285951
so basically uniswap’s team, protocol of eth, created their own launchpad Pools on robinhood. the mascot of the launchpad is this gay frog. so yeah this is a very good narrative and the team has done a lot to push this. created a sick website, hundreds of arts and just have the million mc vision might be a crazy frontrun if Pools launchpad gets more volume and especially if it flips pons $UNITOAD
custom 53438199520234285955😭4🗿1custom 53192178424810132911
idk i might just be retarded but i am getting the unicorn fart dust vibes that went to like 500M or something in the peak memecoin supercycle
custom 53438199520234285956😭1custom 53192178424810132911
why are the chuds crying to my messages
custom 53349175800354683376😭2
a friend sent me this play i took 3% 0x9e32881c57d7c345a09433814da57d869bdb166f
😭5custom 53192178424810132913🗿2custom 53438199520234285951
today’s been an L but robinhood’s volume is fireeee and major coins like $CASHCAT are mooning will probably find us some opportunity soon gotta make that bag man
🗿4custom 53192178424810132914custom 53438199520234285951
took one for the team
custom 53192178424810132918custom 53438199520234285955😭2
down $650 on $HEDGEHOG will ride it to 0 so whatever happens idgaf anymore but yeah ppl are cruel dawg you cant really trust nobody
😭6custom 53192178424810132912custom 53349175800354683372
i will still be pushing $HEDGEHOG btw lil bro has a long journey ahead of him
🗿4custom 53192178424810132911custom 53438199520234285951
i dont wanna be that guy but… woozy candle?
🗿6custom 53192178424810132915custom 53438199520234285952
Showing the 12 most recent of 23 posts we hold for @woozyintel. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
wen launch
The shares total 104%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 7 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank — 286,374 of 1,169,250entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
@woozyintel named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all.A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Woozy Intel” (@woozyintel), 1,676 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/woozyintel.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.