Channel
@zjhxvshv111
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
409subscribers
+329 since we began measuring on 26 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1004302537094 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @zjhxvshv111 |
| Created | 26 August 2026 — measured — dated from the channel’s first post |
| First recorded | 26 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 11 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 11 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/zjhxvshv111 |
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 22 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 93% 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 11 Sept 2026, 21:42 | 409 | +35 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 18:38 | 374 | +232 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 12:43 | 142 | +62 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 16:15 | 80 | first reading |
4 posts held, back to 26 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 1 page of 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 2 of 3 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 26 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 4 (26 August 2026 – 26 August 2026) |
| Views total | 698 |
| Reactions total | 2 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 26 Aug 2026, 16:15 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.
Measured directly from 1 video with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
2 reactions across 2 posts, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 2 | 100.0% |
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 2 of the 4 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 2 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 4 most recent posts we hold, published 26 August 2026 to 26 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.
厦门工兵推荐榜 t.me/renzhenggongkaiban ❤️萝卜青菜各有所爱，出击感受仅代表个人喜好以及观点，请各位自行斟酌考量❗️ 【出击日期】：8.26 【验证人】：candice 【老师艺名】：思媛 【老师账号】：@ooooopioooo 【地 区 】：思明区 【水费/次】：p600 【人照相似】：90 【目测年龄】：21 【颜值妆造】：90 【身材曲线】：93 【乳房状态】：C 【臀部形态】：圆润 【皮肤状态】：手感很好 【服务评分】：95 【情绪价值】：95 【日☀️后感/详细描述】： 思媛妹子颜值很不错，声音温柔，和皮肤一样细腻，嫩的出水，瘦小且有胸，C胸，口活一流，妹妹水多，脸型很好，标准的美人胚子，和照片基本没差别。 重点说下口活儿吧，妹妹还是太会了，不说停一直口，感觉已经把欲望完全点燃了，口的我都快出了，然后再开干，直接瞬秒，没要3分钟，还是我最近太虚了，需要调理调理了，不过老师服务态度…
【时间】：2026-08-26 【老师】：思媛 【留名】：Lfsxd 【评价】：👍 好评 【人照】：9 【颜值】：9 【身材】：9 【服务】：9 【态度】：10 【环境】：9 【综合】：9.17 【过程】：看了照片是自己喜欢的类型，就果断约课了，想着怕1p太快结束，就预了2p。依旧遥控上楼，一开门就看到老师在门口等我，个子160，和她课表一样身材好啊，特别是那一对胸，人也漂亮。说话声音软软糯糯的很好听，付完水费后跟老师一起洗，老师挺讲卫生的，洗得挺干净，而且无套口的口技也很好，这一点深得我心。老师服务挺好，很会调情，虽然我放不太开，但还是挺有意思的，值得体验一下。
❤1
用户名：@ooooopioooo 双向机器人：@siyuanbb_bot
❤1
Channel created
Showing the 4 most recent of 4 posts we hold for @zjhxvshv111. 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.
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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
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 11 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“思媛🍑（思明区）” (@zjhxvshv111), 409 subscribers as measured 11 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/zjhxvshv111.
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.