Crypto & trading — 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 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% 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
62 measurements spanning 92 days, net +48,137. 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 42,173–125,157 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 62
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
7 Nov 2026, 10:35
101,404
-1,013
6 Nov 2026, 07:20
102,417
+271
5 Nov 2026, 06:44
102,146
-1,687
4 Nov 2026, 02:56
103,833
-420
3 Nov 2026, 02:07
104,253
-513
2 Nov 2026, 02:28
104,766
-1,076
1 Nov 2026, 00:06
105,842
-460
30 Oct 2026, 23:35
106,302
-1,000
29 Oct 2026, 22:20
107,302
-498
28 Oct 2026, 23:09
107,800
-1,009
27 Oct 2026, 20:56
108,809
-428
26 Oct 2026, 21:39
109,237
-553
26 Oct 2026, 00:19
109,790
-208
25 Oct 2026, 03:37
109,998
-652
24 Oct 2026, 01:07
110,650
-438
23 Oct 2026, 02:17
111,088
-609
21 Oct 2026, 21:55
111,697
-374
20 Oct 2026, 13:59
112,071
-260
19 Oct 2026, 16:27
112,331
-1,200
18 Oct 2026, 17:58
113,531
first reading
Engagement
612 posts held, back to 1 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 192 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
6.40%
avg views ÷ 101,404 subscribers
Avg views / post
6,490
180 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.805%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
181
of 612 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 179 of 180 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 5 November 2026
Posts held
612 (1 August 2026 – 5 November 2026)
Views total
1,167,838
Reactions total
9,353
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Nov 2026, 22:50 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
≈3,940
Videos
≈57
Links
≈3,260
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 7 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Video runtime
26s
Average length
5s
Measured directly from 5 videos 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.
Reaction mix
35,211 reactions across 607 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 26.9% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
9,460
26.9%
🔥
8,615
24.5%
❤
8,613
24.5%
🎉
8,437
24.0%
🐳
67
0.19%
❤🔥
19
0.054%
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 608 of the 612 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 35,211 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 612 most recent posts we hold, published 1 August 2026 to 5 November 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 10 of 181 posts held from the last 30 days (5.52%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
🪙$RICO=PROMOTED BY
@CHINESE_DRAGON_CALLS🔥
新币项目仍处于早期阶段,而这正是它值得持续关注的原因。社区正在不断壮大,整体氛围活跃,随着项目持续发展,该项目显然有潜力吸引更多关注。对于正在寻找下一个具有增长空间项目的投资者和交易者来说,这是一个值得密切关注的项目。尽早参与可以在一个项目被广泛知晓之前获得一定的关注度,但一如既往,最强大的机会来自真实的社区、持续的建设以及不断增长的市场兴趣。关注度正在开始积累。真正的问题是,这个项目从这里开始究竟能够走多远。请做好自己的研究,关注项目的发展,并密切观察图表。DYOR。
🪙SOL合约: 8kuQg3WivDtL85VEdw2jEmSXjYt6EEeYBATJ4DtQpump
📺CHART: https://dexscreener.com/solana/Fby8NV8FRJZnZriiHUdVANBadTLJfBNT9MVkkN61FoLY…
🔥13❤8🎉8👍4
Showing the 12 most recent of 612 posts we hold for @Chinese_dragon_calls. 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 recorded as deleted after publishing
We recorded 8 posts on @Chinese_dragon_calls as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
First seen missing
19 August 2026
Most recent seen missing
24 October 2026
Median time before seen missing
45 hours
Seen missing in the last 30 days
2
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, totalling 14%. 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 612 most recent posts we hold, published 1 August 2026 to 5 November 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.
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
10
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
7
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
3
vacant every time we have ever looked
@Chinese_dragon_calls named 10 handles 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.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
@pve_unite_coin named in 3 posts, 30 October 2026 – 2 November 2026 · confirmed gone 5 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@tanukicoinerc20 named in 2 posts, 11 September 2026 – 13 September 2026 · confirmed gone 10 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@memestock_potal named in 2 posts, 5 September 2026 – 6 September 2026 · confirmed gone 14 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@stagwifhood named in 1 post, 18 August 2026 – 18 August 2026 · confirmed gone 4 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@og_kekius_maximus named in 1 post, 18 August 2026 – 18 August 2026 · confirmed gone 27 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@cashdogonsolana named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026 · confirmed gone 6 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@qlim_flap named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026 · confirmed gone 20 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@tusneldaxtsnxofficia named in 4 posts, 17 September 2026 – 20 September 2026
@caesar_doge2 named in 4 posts, 17 September 2026 – 20 September 2026
@marvin_erc20 named in 2 posts, 5 September 2026 – 6 September 2026
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 24 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
𝐓𝐀𝐊𝐀𝐍𝐀 𝐄𝐓𝐇 𝐒𝐮𝐫𝐠𝐞 𝐊𝐨𝐥𝐬🪐 @takanaeth101 · 33,772 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 74 here — alongside 73 others — read 2 September 2026
☎️熊猫泵营销渠道 (PANDA MARKETING &CALLS[TRX ETH SOL BSC TON]🈵 ⛩️🇨🇳 @pandacallslonge3 · 55,354 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 24 August 2026
🐳CHINESE CRYPTO WHALES 🇨🇳🇨🇳💷 🐳 || 大鯨魚 @WHALESPUMPBANK · 22,837 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 79 here — alongside 78 others — read 18 September 2026
CGT ASIAN COMMUNITY @ChineasswhalesCGT · 35,791 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 65 here — alongside 64 others — read 1 September 2026
🐳CODY WHALES CALL 中國🐳 @CODYWHALESCALLS · 219,002 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 11 August 2026
中國東部加密聯盟 EASTERN CHINA CRYPTO ALLIANCE @CHINAGEMOFCCCN · 95,784 Telegram ranks this channel #11 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 18 August 2026
中国密码鲸公司 🇨🇳🐳🚀🌖 @ChinapumpWXC · 110,608 Telegram ranks this channel #11 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 14 August 2026
Moontok 月兔 @moonspace · 15,178 Telegram ranks this channel #12 of 72 here — alongside 71 others — read 4 October 2026
☎️中国宝石-匚卄丨几乇丂乇🐳 @cryptogems55552 · 159,710 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 14 August 2026
Topresale 💎 @topresale · 88,372 Telegram ranks this channel #15 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 18 August 2026
Whale 鲸鱼 🔶 BNB @ChinaPumpCommunity · 61,800 Telegram ranks this channel #19 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 14 September 2026
Shakers Calls @marine_CryptoCalls · 74,125 Telegram ranks this channel #38 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 20 August 2026
𝐙𝐄𝐔𝐒 𝐆𝐄𝐌 💎 @zeus_gem · 62,664 Telegram ranks this channel #43 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 21 August 2026
ᗰᗩYᗷᗩᑕᕼ 鲸鱼 💮 @maybac_whales · 45,851 Telegram ranks this channel #44 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 30 August 2026
Crypto 100X Gems 🚨️ @TheCrypto100XGems · 22,488 Telegram ranks this channel #48 of 79 here — alongside 78 others — read 9 September 2026
TOP TRENDING BSC PUMP ( LIVE) @BSCTRENDINGLIVE · 19,863 Telegram ranks this channel #51 of 68 here — alongside 67 others — read 20 September 2026
🦄 𝗔𝗹𝗽𝗵𝗮 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗖𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘀🐳 @AlphaWhale_Calls · 21,197 Telegram ranks this channel #53 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 30 September 2026
DeFi Doxx Calls @Defidoxxcalls · 31,777 Telegram ranks this channel #60 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 5 September 2026
Crypto Panda Gems💎 @CryptoPandaGems_1 · 27,085 Telegram ranks this channel #60 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 1 September 2026
Tesla Calls® @Teslacallsofficial · 70,795 Telegram ranks this channel #60 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 30 August 2026
MiniDraft Calls @minidraftcalls · 73,872 Telegram ranks this channel #60 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 20 August 2026
𝐂𝐫𝐲𝐩𝐭𝐨 𝐃𝐞𝐅𝐢 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐬 ☎💯 @CryptoDefi_Calls · 24,321 Telegram ranks this channel #63 of 78 here — alongside 77 others — read 8 September 2026
𝐂𝐫𝐲𝐩𝐭𝐨 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐆𝐞𝐦𝐬 🚀🚀 @CryptoSuper_Gems · 32,374 Telegram ranks this channel #66 of 78 here — alongside 77 others — read 8 September 2026
𝗖𝗿𝘆𝗽𝘁𝗼 𝗫 𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗚𝗲𝗺𝘀 💎 @CryptoXhighGems · 18,293 Telegram ranks this channel #68 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 29 September 2026
This channel appears in 27 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 7 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“看涨中國人 🇨🇳 DRAGON CALL ☏” (@Chinese_dragon_calls), 101,404 subscribers as measured 7 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Chinese_dragon_calls.
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.