Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for حسین قتیب

Channel

حسین قتیب

@HosseinGhatib

On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

7,291subscribers

+1,173 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1002282627191
TypeChannel
Username@HosseinGhatib
Descriptionنوشته‌هایم درباره‌ی تاریخ، سیاست، ادبیات و جامعه همه کارها را سر اندرنشیب / مگر دست گیرد حسین قتیب! #فردوسی لینک اکانت در ایکس https://x.com/hosseinghatib ای دی کانال در بله @HosseinGhatib
CreatedBetween 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live3 November 2026
Measurements held26
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 3 November 2026
On Telegramt.me/HosseinGhatib

Topic

Other / unclassifiable — 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 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 46% 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.

Observations

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.

Content that also appears on other registered channels

Posts published here appear word for word on 1 other registered channel. 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.

Matching posts — open both and compare (1 of the pairs behind the counts below)
Posted firstThenOverlapGap
@HosseinGhatib/994 · this entry2 Aug 2026, 17:21 UTC@jalaeipour/175912 Aug 2026, 20:15 UTC1.002.9 hours
Every channel this entry shares post bodies with
ChannelMatching postsText overlapTypical gapPublished first
@jalaeipour6 (6/6 hand-verifiable sample passed)1.0029 hoursthis entry (6–0)

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. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.

“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 16 comparable posts for this entry, running 30 July 2026 to 4 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.

  • Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
  • 'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
  • shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
  • Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).

Across the whole group of 2, the earliest publisher we hold is @HosseinGhatib — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.

Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 7 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.

Also posting the same content

This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, 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.

Growth

6,1137,2916,7026 August 2026 — 6,118 subscribers6 August 2026 — 6,118 subscribers7 August 2026 — 6,113 subscribers10 August 2026 — 6,157 subscribers13 August 2026 — 6,155 subscribers16 August 2026 — 6,151 subscribers18 August 2026 — 6,193 subscribers22 August 2026 — 6,204 subscribers25 August 2026 — 6,192 subscribers28 August 2026 — 6,191 subscribers31 August 2026 — 6,198 subscribers2 September 2026 — 6,218 subscribers8 September 2026 — 6,239 subscribers12 September 2026 — 6,447 subscribers15 September 2026 — 6,585 subscribers26 September 2026 — 6,699 subscribers5 October 2026 — 6,767 subscribers11 October 2026 — 6,858 subscribers14 October 2026 — 7,031 subscribers17 October 2026 — 7,061 subscribers20 October 2026 — 7,072 subscribers24 October 2026 — 7,217 subscribers26 October 2026 — 7,254 subscribers29 October 2026 — 7,271 subscribers1 November 2026 — 7,275 subscribers3 November 2026 — 7,291 subscribers6 August 20263 November 2026
26 measurements spanning 90 days, net +1,173. 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 5,936–7,468 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 26
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
3 Nov 2026, 20:587,291+16
1 Nov 2026, 01:587,275+4
29 Oct 2026, 11:167,271+17
26 Oct 2026, 16:257,254+37
24 Oct 2026, 01:387,217+145
20 Oct 2026, 20:257,072+11
17 Oct 2026, 20:557,061+30
14 Oct 2026, 10:457,031+173
11 Oct 2026, 01:196,858+91
5 Oct 2026, 06:556,767+68
26 Sept 2026, 21:216,699+114
15 Sept 2026, 20:586,585+138
12 Sept 2026, 14:396,447+208
8 Sept 2026, 08:166,239+21
2 Sept 2026, 21:056,218+20
31 Aug 2026, 01:046,198+7
28 Aug 2026, 03:346,191-1
25 Aug 2026, 04:346,192-12
22 Aug 2026, 03:036,204+11
18 Aug 2026, 22:166,193first reading

Engagement

52 posts held, back to 30 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 14 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
48.8%
avg views ÷ 7,291 subscribers
Avg views / post
3,550
23 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.99%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
24
of 52 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.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 4 November 2026
Posts held52 (30 July 2026 – 4 November 2026)
Views total81,760
Reactions total1,623
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken5 Nov 2026, 13:41 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
170
Videos
19
Links
140

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 5 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.

Video runtime
1m 39s
Average length
50s

Measured directly from 2 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

2,824 reactions across 50 posts, in 23 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 61.6% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍1,73961.6%
❤50918.0%
👏1866.59%
👎1575.56%
💯592.09%
🥴321.13%
👌301.06%
🤣301.06%
😁230.814%
🤔150.531%
😢110.39%
🙏90.319%
🤷‍♂60.212%
🔥50.177%
✍30.106%
🤨20.071%
🥰20.071%
🆒10.035%
👨‍💻10.035%
👻10.035%
3 further kinds30.106%

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 50 of the 52 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 2,824 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 52 most recent posts we hold, published 30 July 2026 to 4 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: 1 of 24 posts held from the last 30 days (4.17%) 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).

4 Nov 2026, 16:44 UTC≈2,640 views83 reactionsread 5 November 2026

‏ونس امروز در واکنش به شکست جمهوری‌خواهان، در متنی کم‌سابقه از نظر صراحت سیاسی، اعلام کرد که دلیل اصلی شکست حزب «جنگ» بوده است. نکته مهم‌تر در تحلیل او این است که جمهوری‌خواهان الزاماً به دلیل عدم مشارکت هوادارانشان شکست نخورده‌اند. به گفته ونس، بسیاری از کسانی که در سال ۲۰۲۴ به ترامپ رأی داده بودند، در انتخابات ۲۰۲۶ پای صندوق‌ها حاضر شدند، اما این بار به دموکرات‌ها رأی دادند. ‏او با استناد به نظرسنجی یکی از مشاوران …

👍60❤22👏1

4 Nov 2026, 12:48 UTC≈2,840 views54 reactionsread 5 November 2026

تگزاس؛ آیا جنگ ایران آغازگر یک زلزله سیاسی تازه در آمریکاست؟ پیروزی دموکرات‌ها در انتخابات سوم نوامبر ۲۰۲۶ در تگزاس، بسیار فراتر از یک شکست انتخاباتی برای جمهوری‌خواهان است. دموکرات‌ها پس از بیش از سه دهه ناکامی در انتخابات سراسری این ایالت، هم فرمانداری و هم کرسی سنای آمریکا را تصاحب کرده‌اند. اما برای فهم اهمیت این اتفاق باید به تاریخ سیاسی آمریکا بازگشت؛ به زمانی که تگزاس و تقریباً تمام ایالت‌های جنوبی، نه سنگر ج…

👍44✍3❤3👎2🤣2

4 Nov 2026, 09:05 UTC≈3,160 views145 reactionsread 5 November 2026

سیزده آبان یا سوم نوامبر، تاریخ بازگشت ایران به سیاست آمریکاست: در ۱۳۵۸، بحران گروگان‌گیری آغاز شد؛ در ۱۳۵۹، کارتر همان روز انتخابات را باخت. در ۱۴۰۵، شکست جمهوری‌خواهان هزینه جنگ با ایران را آشکار کرد. ‏ترامپ که کارتر را نماد ضعف در برابر ایران می‌خواند، خود در ۳ نوامبر گرفتار پیامدهای جنگ شد.

👍115🤣18❤5👎3🙏3🔥1

3 Nov 2026, 21:32 UTC≈2,700 views139 reactionsread 5 November 2026

اندر حکایتِ دوختن دهان‌ها با نخِ احتیاط پاسخی کوتاه به «جناب دکتر» محمد فاضلی «تسلیحات تخمیه» بازی زبانی است؛ «همه در سکوت ساخته‌اند» ادعای تاریخی نادرست است؛ و «بساط بحث را جمع کنید» توصیه سیاسی از موضع محافل آشنای امنیتی. اولی ذوق می‌خواهد، دومی سند و سومی استدلال. ذوقِ اولی جای خالی آن دو را پُر نمی‌کند. در نادرستی ادعای جنابتان‌ همین بس که فرانسه در سال ۱۹۵۶، پیش از نخستین آزمایش هسته‌ای خود، در مجلس علناً دربا…

👍103👎16❤14🤣2👏1🔥1🥴1😇1

3 Nov 2026, 07:53 UTC≈3,160 views103 reactionsread 5 November 2026

بازدارندگی ملی؛ نه کره شمالی، نه طالبان، نه یمن در فضای سیاسی ایران، تلاشی آشکار جریان دارد تا گفتمان دفاع از قدرت ملی و بازدارندگی، به‌ویژه بازدارندگی هسته‌ای، با اقتدارگرایی سیاسی، محدودیت آزادی‌های اجتماعی و عقب‌ماندگی اقتصادی پیوند بخورد. گویی دفاع از قدرت ملی و استقلال کشور الزاماً به معنای پذیرش نظام سیاسی بسته‌ای شبیه کره شمالی، مناسبات اجتماعی طالبانی و اقتصادی ویران و منزوی همچون یمن است. در این تصویرسازی، …

💯46❤24👍18👎5👏5🤨2😁2🤣1

2 Nov 2026, 22:01 UTC≈2,860 views55 reactionsread 5 November 2026

از انحصار آنتن تا بازار چهره‌ها؛ چه کسی برای چه کسی برندسازی می‌کند؟ در گذشته، صداوسیما تقریباً انحصار ساختن و حذف چهره‌های رسانه‌ای را در اختیار داشت. این نهاد تصمیم می‌گرفت چه کسی دیده شود، چه کسی به شهرت برسد و چه کسی به حاشیه رانده شود. کافی بود فردی را به‌صورت مداوم به برنامه‌های مختلف دعوت کند تا به‌تدریج به یک شخصیت شناخته‌شده، کارشناس معتبر یا حتی مرجع فکری تبدیل شود. همان نهادی که چهره‌ای را می‌ساخت، می‌توا…

👍33❤10🤷‍♂6🤔3🥴2👎1

2 Nov 2026, 06:39 UTC≈3,470 views130 reactionsread 5 November 2026

تاکر کارلسون در گزارشی هشدار داده است که نتانیاهو به‌شدت در حال فشار آوردن به ترامپ برای استفاده از سلاح هسته‌ای علیه تأسیسات زیرزمینی ایران است و احتمال دارد دولت آمریکا طی روزهای آینده درباره چنین حمله‌ای تصمیم بگیرد. به گفته کارلسون، اسرائیل معتقد است که تسلیحات متعارف آمریکا قادر به نابودی این تأسیسات نیستند و از همین رو به دنبال استفاده از گزینه هسته‌ای است. ما بارها، به‌ویژه در ماه‌های گذشته، هشدار دادیم که در …

👍92👎18👏7😢5❤4🥴3💯1

31 Oct 2026, 18:16 UTC≈4,230 views104 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Video

به نظر می‌رسد ایران از بحث تغییر دکترین هسته‌ای به‌عنوان کارتی برای فشار بر غرب استفاده می‌کند تا نشان دهد مطالبه‌ای داخلی برای این تغییر وجود دارد. اما این بازی می‌تواند نتیجه‌ای معکوس داشته باشد. طرف مقابل ممکن است محاسبه کند که پیش از عبور ایران از آستانه هسته‌ای، فرصت محدودی برای حمله مجدد و نابودی ظرفیت‌های موجود دارد. در این صورت، تهدیدی که قرار بود بازدارندگی ایجاد کند، خود به انگیزه‌ای برای حمله تبدیل می‌شود.…

👍89❤6🤔6👎3

31 Oct 2026, 07:11 UTC≈4,550 views111 reactionsread 5 November 2026

سال‌هاست چند مغالطه درباره سلاح هسته‌ای در فضای سیاسی ایران تکرار می‌شود؛ مغالطه‌هایی که وجه مشترکشان این است که از بازدارندگی هسته‌ای انتظار انجام کارهایی را دارند که اساساً برای آن طراحی نشده است! ۱. می‌گویند شوروی بمب اتم داشت، ولی فروپاشید! خب، مگر قرار بوده بمب اتم تورم را کنترل کند، اقتصاد را اصلاح کند و حزب کمونیست را نجات دهد؟! سلاح هسته‌ای ابزار جلوگیری از نابودی کشور به دست دشمن خارجی است، نه بیمه عمر حک…

👍80👎12👏12❤4🥴3

30 Oct 2026, 23:22 UTC≈3,380 views37 reactionsread 5 November 2026

‏نسل، انسان‌هایی هستند که با نابودی زیرساخت‌ها، قحطی، بیماری، مهاجرت اجباری، آلودگی محیط زیست و فروپاشی خدمات عمومی در معرض مرگ و نابودی قرار می‌گیرند. ‏از این منظر، تهدید به نابودی زیرساخت‌های یک کشور تنها یک اقدام نظامی علیه اشیاء و ساختمان‌ها نیست. حمله به برق، آب، پل‌ها، بیمارستان‌ها و مراکز تولید غذا، در نهایت حمله به «نسل» از طریق نابودی «حرث» است. ‏وقتی شبکه آب نابود می‌شود، کودکان و بیماران قربانی می‌شوند. …

❤25👏9👍3

30 Oct 2026, 23:22 UTC≈2,810 views19 reactionsread 5 November 2026

ین دقیقاً منطق بازدارندگی است. بازدارندگی زمانی شکل می‌گیرد که دشمن بداند: ‏نخست، طرف مقابل قدرت پاسخ‌گویی دارد. ‏دوم، این قدرت در اثر حمله نخست به‌طور کامل نابود نمی‌شود. ‏سوم، اراده سیاسی استفاده از آن در شرایط تهدید وجودی وجود دارد. ‏چهارم، هزینه تجاوز از منافع احتمالی آن بیشتر خواهد بود. ‏بنابراین، هدف نخست قدرت بازدارنده، استفاده از آن نیست. هدف، بی‌نیازشدن از استفاده از طریق منصرف‌کردن دشمن است. موفق‌ترین …

👍11👏5👎2❤1

30 Oct 2026, 23:20 UTC≈2,600 views32 reactionsread 5 November 2026

‏بازدارندگی در قرآن؛ از «إعداد قوّه» تا حفاظت از «نسل و حرث» ‏هنگامی که یک ابر قدرت نظامی از نابودی تمدن یک ملت، تخریب پل‌ها، انهدام شبکه برق و آب، و از کار انداختن زیرساخت‌های حیاتی سخن می‌گوید، هدفش تنها اعلام یک عملیات نظامی احتمالی نیست. چنین سخنانی در پی شکستن اراده سیاسی، ایجاد وحشت اجتماعی و القای این تصور است که کشور هدف هیچ وسیله‌ای برای دفاع از موجودیت خود ندارد. ‏در برابر چنین تهدیدی، مسئله اصلی صرفاً دا…

👍20👏6❤3🥴3

Showing the 12 most recent of 52 posts we hold for @HosseinGhatib. 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.

Forward network

Republishes

Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.

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 7 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.

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.

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 3 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“حسین قتیب” (@HosseinGhatib), 7,291 subscribers as measured 3 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/HosseinGhatib.

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.