隔壁老王?
👍1

Channel
@DNYQWCG
On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
74,252subscribers
-4,583 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 31,623–100,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001350651934 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Usernames | @cg9cg @DNYQWCG |
| Description | 本频道包含柯南为探友们精心挑选收集的当前热瓜、热辣美女、实录视频、时事禁闻,希望您能喜欢。 东南亚事件曝光频道:https://t.me/DNYBG234 东南亚狗推吃瓜频道:https://t.me/GTKX888 投稿机器人:@kenantg_bot 商务机器人:@EKkenan_bot 唯一商务合作:@ekko520 唯一免费投稿:@dnykn6 ⚠️:建议先联系机器人,优先回复机器人消息。投稿账号不谈商务! 本频道所发布的所有内容均来源投稿、推特、即刻、YouTube等公共平台,均不代表本频道观点 |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 August 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 7 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 120 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 7 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/DNYQWCG |
Gambling & betting — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 10 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 99% 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.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Posts published here appear word for word on 2 other registered channels. They sit inside a group of 8 channels that share the same post bodies with each other. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @Gaoxiaoman/2857787 Aug 2026, 14:48 UTC | @DNYQWCG/232150 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 16:42 UTC | 1.00 | 1.9 hours |
| @DNYQWCG/232151 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 16:42 UTC | @Gaoxiaoman/2858517 Aug 2026, 16:42 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @DNYQWCG/232153 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 16:42 UTC | @Gaoxiaoman/2858537 Aug 2026, 16:42 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @DNYQWCG/232156 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 16:43 UTC | @Gaoxiaoman/2858557 Aug 2026, 16:43 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @DNYQWCG/232157 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 16:43 UTC | @Gaoxiaoman/2858567 Aug 2026, 16:43 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @gtkx1/1222276 Aug 2026, 17:00 UTC | @DNYQWCG/232166 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 17:00 UTC | 1.00 | 24 hours |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @Gaoxiaoman | 5 (5/5 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | under a minute | this entry (4–1) |
| @gtkx1 | 5 (5/5 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | under a minute | this entry (3–2) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. 3 of the 3 matches recorded here fall after that date and carried no header when we read them. The rest predate reliable capture and are not evidence either way.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 23 comparable posts for this entry, running 6 August 2026 to 7 August 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Across the whole group of 8, the earliest publisher we hold is @gtkx1. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the keys clone_mutual · clone_source, last confirmed 8 August 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 7 other registered channels, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Nov 2026, 04:26 | 74,252 | -110 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 15:16 | 74,362 | -62 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 07:15 | 74,424 | -139 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 13:50 | 74,563 | -69 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 07:51 | 74,632 | -91 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 14:36 | 74,723 | -9 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 10:34 | 74,732 | -128 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 17:56 | 74,860 | -94 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 07:58 | 74,954 | -160 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 19:59 | 75,114 | -129 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 09:10 | 75,243 | -19 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 22:38 | 75,262 | -66 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 07:04 | 75,328 | -67 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 23:15 | 75,395 | -126 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 08:41 | 75,521 | -78 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 22:36 | 75,599 | -85 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 12:16 | 75,684 | -86 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 01:51 | 75,770 | -125 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 09:05 | 75,895 | -59 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 02:28 | 75,954 | first reading |
2,476 posts held, back to 6 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 188 pages 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 167 of 788 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 2,476 (6 August 2026 – 7 November 2026) |
| Views total | 1,342,608 |
| Reactions total | 189 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Nov 2026, 07:22 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.
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.
Measured directly from 565 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.
194 reactions across 170 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 89.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 173 | 89.2% | |
| ❤ | 14 | 7.22% | |
| 😁 | 3 | 1.55% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 0.515% | |
| 🔥 | 1 | 0.515% | |
| 🤩 | 1 | 0.515% | |
| 🥰 | 1 | 0.515% |
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 172 of the 1,000 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 194 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 1 October 2026 to 7 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.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 0 of 789 posts held from the last 30 days (0%) 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).
隔壁老王?
👍1
11月6,云工商...无意间拍到的, 应该是片场事故吧 ,希望人没事 !
👍1
😎😎😎😎😎 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎 😎↖️😎😎😎😎😎😎🛍😎😎😎 🌐 亿级域名|2G.COM 品牌定位全球 实力超乎想象 全网福利天花板 入款笔笔送3%无上限 全网召集【老玩家入驻】VIP等级1:1平移 同行文案写的天花乱坠 不如2G的U到位 全球布局 · 100%保障出款 · 秒充秒提 💥新人超会赢,精彩时刻分享: 😎 PG电子 新玩家游戏中爆出160万U大奖,本金仅用8000U 😎😎😎 😎 DB真人 玩百家乐的老板,第一天存款66万U,提款680万U 😎😎😎 😎😎😎😎: 2g130.cc 🛍🛍🛍😎: @GF2Gcom 🥰领🥰会员 😎😎😎😎: @KF2Gcom 😎😎😎😎: @DL2Gcom 😎😎😎😎: @sx2ggbot 😎😎😎😎🛍😎😎😎 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎
👍2
新全迅网·娱乐平台风向标·游戏中心 🚨 查信誉·看曝光·找优惠·有担保 🔔 关注频道每天免费送VIP高级会员 🥇 新全迅网致力于打造公开、公正、透明的娱乐平台信息服务体系,依托全网数据监测、真实用户反馈及多维度数据分析,为广大用户提供平台信誉查询、风险预警、黑平台曝光、优惠信息整合等一站式服务。 🥈 我们坚持以真实评价为依据,以数据分析为支撑,持续完善平台信誉评级与风险预警机制,让每一位用户都能获得更加真实、可靠的参考信息。 🥉同时,汇聚全网真实优惠资源,精选各大平台优质福利,拒绝虚假宣传与噱头,让每一份优惠都真实可查、一目了然。 ✔️选平台,先查信誉,选择更放心。 ✔️避风险,先看曝光,远离黑平台。 ✔️找优惠,真实精选,拒绝套路。 ✔️你了解娱乐平台信息的第一站。 黑平台一键查看⚠️信誉评测风险预警 关注新全迅网频道🔈 @xqxw 官方网站: xqxw.com 投稿: @qxwkefu
👍1
一人一枪一打退5人持枪劫匪,华子哥不是一般炮呀!
游乐场孩子闹矛盾,双方家长打的胜负难分
根本没有这样的机位
#很有精神 😑
通过挑逗让小男娘彻底失神失禁 先让小男娘舒适地躺在床上,或是坐在沙发上。暂时不要开锁,只用抚摸和按摩让他全身慢慢放松。时不时地去挑逗那些除了阴茎和肛门以外的敏感区域——耳朵、脖子、腰侧、乳头,以及脚底,往往都是很敏感的地方。如果让他穿上丝袜,脚底的触感会和裸足完全不同,多用轻挠和轻捏的方式,效果会更好。 当他完全放松下来、逐渐进入状态时,鸡鸡已经开始分泌少量黏液。这时候可以换成嘴巴。从额头开始,慢慢往下亲吻他的脸——包括眼睛和脸颊——亲吻的同时,手继续在他身上游走。等吻到嘴唇时,他多半已经迫不及待地主动迎上来,和你湿吻。 亲吻结束后,继续舔他的耳朵和脖子,再慢慢往下。到胸部时,先用双手轻轻拨弄两边的乳头。经过前面的爱抚,它们应该已经挺立起来。先让他熟悉这种刺激的感觉,然后再用舌头慢慢舔舐。舌头刚一接触,敏感的小男娘往往会忍不住轻哼出声。另一只手也不要闲着,持续挑逗另一边的乳头,或者顺着身体往下,轻轻划过他的鸡鸡、蛋蛋和肛门…
帮你挠挠,叫我雷锋
出轨后女方只能分40%的夫妻共同财产了,真是太不照顾女性了
美国网友AI恶搞:新德克萨斯州
Showing the 12 most recent of 2,476 posts we hold for @DNYQWCG. 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.
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.
@DNYQWCG 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.
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 19 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.
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.
This channel appears in 5 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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.
“吃瓜驿站😋🍉” (@DNYQWCG), 74,252 subscribers as measured 7 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/DNYQWCG.
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.