Memes & entertainment — 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 23 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 30% 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.
Growth
5 measurements spanning 32 days, net +10. 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 274–287 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
9 Sept 2026, 01:38
285
+8
30 Aug 2026, 22:54
277
-1
16 Aug 2026, 16:07
278
+3
8 Aug 2026, 08:45
275
no change
7 Aug 2026, 18:06
275
first reading
Engagement
6 posts held, back to 7 November 2025 — 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.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 6 posts for this entry, the most recent from 8 March 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
11s
Average length
11s
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.
Reaction mix
463 reactions across 6 posts, in 22 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.1% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
232
50.1%
🔥
83
17.9%
🥰
36
7.78%
❤🔥
21
4.54%
🍓
19
4.10%
🍾
19
4.10%
👏
8
1.73%
😁
7
1.51%
👍
6
1.30%
⚡
5
1.08%
🎄
5
1.08%
💋
5
1.08%
😍
4
0.864%
💘
3
0.648%
🆒
2
0.432%
💩
2
0.432%
🌚
1
0.216%
😨
1
0.216%
🙏
1
0.216%
🤔
1
0.216%
2 further kinds
2
0.432%
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 6 of the 6 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 463 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 6 most recent posts we hold, published 7 November 2025 to 8 March 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.
Ничего не планировала писать к 8 марту. К датам я отношусь как к поводу для срочных постов — обычно это плохой повод
Но тут в ленте выскочил пост Кати Егошиной. И я подписалась под каждым словом. Тот случай, когда за меня всё сказали
Катя написала, что по-настоящему счастлива, потому что ни одно её серьёзное решение в жизни не определялось тем, что она женщина
Ни карьерные повороты, ни смена городов, ни выбор мужч…
Друзья, а у нас, кажется, объявили внеплановые коммуникационные учения. Всеобщая диванная мобилизация. Паника уровня «Телеграм лег», но паника особая, экзистенциальная
Страна, которая пережила блокировку запретграмов, вновь оказалась на перепутье: куда переходить, если вдруг?
Одни срочно зовут в МАХ (это который «как Телеграм, но с родиной»). Другие предлагают вернуться в ВК, где всех ждут старые-добрые демотиватор…
Год, который невозможно подвести. Никаких итогов, только инвентаризация
Друзья, в этом посте есть мат. Если вас это может ранить, пожалуйста, не читайте то, что спрятано под скрытым текстом
Работать без плана А
Когда нет ни «плана А», ни «плана Б», включается самый честный режим — «херачить», а паника приходит потом. Или не приходит
Узнать людей заново
Вчера — незнакомец. Сегодня — союзник, для которого помощь …
Как в один пост уместить жизнь?
Четыре года назад я, без опыта работы в высшем образовании, пришла работать в Московский Политех
Думала, что вот во всем быстро разберусь и кааак заживём. Как же больно было падать с высоты своих иллюзий)
Первые месяцы я ходила на совещания с диктофоном, чтобы послушать часовые записи вечером (а часто и ночью) на второй раз, погуглить незнакомые слова/фамилии, составить список вопро…
Искусство — это коммуникация со звездочкой. Или с подвохом
Это форма диалога, которая обходит рациональные фильтры и с ноги бьёт в эмоции. Пожалуй, это самый мощный инструмент разговора с самим собой
Мы с мужем сходили на «Последнее лето» в театр Наций. Билеты не могли достать почти два года. Так вот: этот спектакль не про красоту. Он про тотальную размотку клубка наших собственных непрожитых тем
Я удивлена, что п…
❤26🔥22🥰9💋2🆒2🌚1🤔1
Showing the 6 most recent of 6 posts we hold for @Gladkova_pro_PR. 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.
Mentions
Named by 1 registered channel — 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
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
@Gladkova_pro_PR 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.
@mr_tr08 named in 1 post, 9 August 2026 – 9 August 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 9 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Гладкова не нарочно” (@Gladkova_pro_PR), 285 subscribers as measured 9 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Gladkova_pro_PR.
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.
