4 measurements spanning 6 days, net +226. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 3,773–4,067 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
14 Aug 2026, 00:13
4,033
+79
11 Aug 2026, 02:37
3,954
+99
8 Aug 2026, 02:57
3,855
+48
7 Aug 2026, 15:46
3,807
first reading
Engagement
8 posts held, back to 26 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 3 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
35.6%
avg views ÷ 4,033 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,440
8 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.32%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
8
of 8 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 7 of 8 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026
Posts held
8 (26 July 2026 – 6 August 2026)
Views total
11,492
Reactions total
264
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
8 Aug 2026, 06:01 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.
Reaction mix
264 reactions across 7 posts, in 9 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 33.0% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
87
33.0%
🔥
74
28.0%
😁
57
21.6%
🎉
17
6.44%
❤
13
4.92%
🤩
10
3.79%
👏
4
1.52%
💯
1
0.379%
😍
1
0.379%
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 7 of the 8 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 264reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 8 most recent posts we hold, published 26 July 2026 to 6 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
3
across the posts below
Posts paid on
3
of 8 we hold a reading for · 38%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @zhuravlevataa. 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 8 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 26 July 2026 to 6 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.
«Хорошо там, где мы!»
Художник Тигран Костан
На фасадах Средней школы № 11 в Назарово появилась настенная роспись из двух композиций. На первой из них изображен ученик у доски, который вместо классной работы рисует свою собственную реальность.
А известная всем пословица «Хорошо там, где нас нет» превращается в противоположное утверждение «Хорошо там, где мы», напоминая о способности человека менять окружающий мир к…
«Пусть всегда будет»
Художник Тигран Костан
Второй мурал на фасаде школы в Назарово посвящён ощущению, которое многим было близко в детстве. Идешь на уроки среди первых желтых листьев, только-только закончились летние каникулы, можно снова обмениваться наклейками с одноклассниками, покупать пиццу в школьной столовой, а впереди еще целый учебный год и вообще вся жизнь.
Фраза «Пусть всегда будет» отсылает к словам пе…
Продолжаю изучать тему связи здоровья и работы.
Сегодня про руководителей и🤑
Цифра, с которой стоит начать👇
DDI Global Leadership Forecast 2025 (10 796 руководителей, 50+ стран): 71% лидеров говорят о значительном росте стресса с момента вступления в должность — против 63% в 2022 году. Из них 54% опасаются выгорания, а 40% всерьёз рассматривали уход с руководящей роли ради собственного здоровья.
Только 30% руководит…
«Торопиться не будем, но и медлить тоже не будем»
Эту фразу приписывают Ивану III — государю, который собирал разрозненные земли в единое государство и почти не проигрывал. Он не был ни лихим рубакой, ни осторожным до паралича правителем. Его сила была в чувстве момента: он умел ждать, пока обстоятельства созреют, и умел действовать ровно тогда, когда медлить становилось опаснее, чем рисковать.
В управлении, да и в…
Поддерживаю отечественного производителя (особенно сейчас на фоне новостей это просто необходимо).
Рекомендация не просто от души - я сама активный пользователь пептидных кремов у Оли уже много лет. А в этом году мои парни-начинающие подростки с первым проявлениями акне тоже вступили в клуб пенки для умывания и сыворотки.
Состав топ, производство не уступает корейскому по качеству - Оля, поверьте, ещё тот контрол-ф…
🔥16😁11👍10🤩3❤2🎉2😍1
Showing the 8 most recent of 8 posts we hold for @zhuravlevataa. 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.
Polls
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.
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is 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 8 most recent posts we hold, published 26 July 2026 to 6 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
Citation-graph rank — 141,882 of 1,480,688entries 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.
Forward network
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.
Mentions
Named by 2 registered channels — 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.
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 14 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Татьяна Журавлёва” (@zhuravlevataa), 4,033 subscribers as measured 14 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/zhuravlevataa.
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.
