为什么链接失效了

Channel
防走丢频道
@xnncdtg
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Polls · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
31,327subscribers
+10,622 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1003765583017 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Usernames | @nanniangxianxia @xnncdtg |
| Description | Hello this channel does not violate the policies of Telegram and we love you @rove with best regards |
| Created | Between 1 February 2026 and 10 July 2026 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 27 October 2026 |
| Measurements held | 99 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 27 October 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/xnncdtg |
Topic
Other / unclassifiable — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 89% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 27 Oct 2026, 10:38 | 31,327 | +27 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 04:30 | 31,300 | +39 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 07:46 | 31,261 | +16 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 02:38 | 31,245 | +76 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 09:45 | 31,169 | +11 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 04:57 | 31,158 | +67 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 12:31 | 31,091 | +11 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 08:31 | 31,080 | +84 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 11:46 | 30,996 | +11 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 07:07 | 30,985 | +89 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 11:38 | 30,896 | -5 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 09:26 | 30,901 | +95 |
| 21 Oct 2026, 04:19 | 30,806 | +10 |
| 21 Oct 2026, 02:36 | 30,796 | +84 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 04:21 | 30,712 | +10 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 01:37 | 30,702 | +120 |
| 19 Oct 2026, 06:49 | 30,582 | +15 |
| 19 Oct 2026, 00:34 | 30,567 | +129 |
| 18 Oct 2026, 04:58 | 30,438 | +23 |
| 17 Oct 2026, 23:21 | 30,415 | first reading |
Engagement
71 posts held, back to 10 July 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 125 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
- ERR · 30 days
- 29.1%
- avg views ÷ 31,327 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 9,110
- 43 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- 0.077%
- reactions ÷ views · ER floor
- Posts in window
- 44
- of 71 held
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 38 of 43 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 26 October 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 71 (10 July 2026 – 26 October 2026) |
| Views total | 391,600 |
| Reactions total | 268 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 27 Oct 2026, 17:15 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.
What this channel posts
- Photos
- 65
- Videos
- 1
- Links
- 27
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 27 October 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
Reaction mix
468 reactions across 54 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 45.9% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 215 | 45.9% | |
| 🤣 | 171 | 36.5% | |
| 💯 | 45 | 9.62% | |
| 🔥 | 17 | 3.63% | |
| 🥰 | 11 | 2.35% | |
| ❤🔥 | 6 | 1.28% | |
| 😍 | 3 | 0.641% |
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 61 of the 71 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 468 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 71 most recent posts we hold, published 10 July 2026 to 26 October 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.
Telegram Stars
- Stars received
- 3
- across the posts below
- Posts paid on
- 2
- of 70 we hold a reading for · 3%
- Most on one post
- 2
- single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @xnncdtg. 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 71 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 10 July 2026 to 26 October 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.
Recent posts
https://t.me/+QPdWU_BrTwcxZDRh 反馈群,如果你被限制了/被管理针对了,请带上截图证据/复制该条消息链接,发在此群
❤2
这么多买苹果的嘛(虽然我也用苹果)
🥰3🤣2
所有群联合封禁,禁止光打广不聊天,贿赂/色诱管理!! 有以财赂群管、妄图苟且者,同属败坏群风气,一经查实,亦予严惩,光打广而不聊天者,带口球 此乃肃清群风、维护群规,所有群管、务须遵守群规,监察他人,不得徇私。违令者,同罪!! 举报热线: https://t.me/+QPdWU_BrTwcxZDRh
❤4
骂花火的唧唧炸了,没有唧唧的逼逼炸了,俩都没有身体炸!
🤣23
发现三个好用的app,玩郊狼可以去 @jiaolangplay 玩哦
#安卓端 #EhViewer #漫画APP EhViewer 是一款免费开源的 Android 漫画阅读器,支持在线浏览与离线下载海量漫画、同人志内容(包含大量 18 禁成人向作品),具备强大的标签搜索、流畅阅读体验和高度自定义功能,无广告、注重隐私。
❤4
用这个的别上tg了,我怕你们某天消失了
🤣37
Posted without readable text
❤1
@iraraymosxptKb205 https://t.me/zukonggroup?livestream 足控群直播,还能玩郊狼,调戏xnn,快来加入直播吧
❤4💯1🥰1
可以在此贴下方留言查询花火好感度(beta)
Sticker, posted without a caption
🔥3
Showing the 12 most recent of 71 posts we hold for @xnncdtg. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@xnncdtg edited 5 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
- First edit seen
- 11 August 2026
- Most recent edit
- 23 October 2026
Polls
The 4 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
是否打开发图(但是会强制要求进备用群)
- 打开(进备用群)96%
- 不进5%
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
重启男娘交友频道,会删之前发过的所有东西,然后严苛审核(不能保证没有坏人混进来)审核方式讨论中
- 可91%
- 不可11%
The shares total 102%, 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.
足控试运行阿福广告杀手
- 感觉还行20%
- 没啥用!请狠狠加大力度(嗯啊嗯啊♂)58%
- 快快给其他群安排上!34%
The shares total 112%, 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.
是否启用阿福的广告杀手
- 启用87%
- 不启用15%
The shares total 102%, 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 71 most recent posts we hold, published 10 July 2026 to 26 October 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.
Forward network
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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.
Mentions
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
@jiaolangplay · 8,49811 posts男娘伪娘分地区聊天群
@weiniangcdxianxia · 22,0469 posts足控男娘SM雌堕伪娘cd交友群调教
@zukonggroup · 20,7789 posts媚黑雌堕男娘群
@loveneige · 6,9437 posts全xp男娘群
@xnntsxp · 19,0777 posts男娘备用群
@zukongsesequn · 3,9817 posts男娘大帝国
@xnncdgroup · 8,7716 posts吃瓜
@xnnchigua · 5574 posts纯男娘聊天审核群(内群4000+男娘)
@xnnshenhe · 3,5324 postsPavel Durov
@durov · 10,232,0662 posts群违规公示
@pianzisiquanjia555 · 22,1802 posts男娘大学 图书馆
@SissyUniversityLibrarys · 227,3992 postsBlacked媚黑电台
@bnwoworldradio · 10,9221 postCloudMusicDownloader
@Music163bot · 10,0181 post媚黑人妖发骚小窝
@pixuedawang · 5,7091 post男娘大学 电影院
@SissyUniversityCinema · 36,3821 post男娘大学 漫画社
@SissyUniversityComicsClub · 42,7871 post男娘大学 交际社
@SissyUniversityCommunication · 16,1801 post男娘大学 文学社
@SissyUniversityDanceClub · 3,6521 post男娘大学 游戏社
@SissyUniversityGame · 11,8031 post男娘大学 ❤️调教室❤️
@SissyUnversityComic · 25,4731 post伪娘TS研究室
@sissyyjs · 7,0641 post雌堕大学
@SlutUniversity · 15,0801 post分地区男娘交友频道
@xianxiaweiniangcd · 5,7341 post
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
- Dead references
- 1
- handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
- Evidenced gone
- 0
- we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
- Never seen alive
- 1
- vacant every time we have ever looked
@xnncdtg 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.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
named in 4 posts, 1 October 2026 – 9 October 2026
Cite this entry
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 27 October 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“防走丢频道” (@xnncdtg), 31,327 subscribers as measured 27 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/xnncdtg.
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.