花名: #栗子 车牌: @lizi891 坐标: #成都 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤10👍2

Channel
@MmFulidafangsong
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Posts recorded as deleted · Citations · Cite this entry
27,604subscribers
+7,647 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1003514450352 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @MmFulidafangsong |
| Created | Between 1 December 2025 and 31 May 2026 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 8 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 62 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 8 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/MmFulidafangsong |
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 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 65% 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Nov 2026, 07:50 | 27,604 | +149 |
| 7 Nov 2026, 01:26 | 27,455 | +125 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 22:26 | 27,330 | +120 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 21:00 | 27,210 | +90 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 21:59 | 27,120 | +107 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 19:38 | 27,013 | +116 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 19:41 | 26,897 | +174 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 16:56 | 26,723 | +113 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 18:28 | 26,610 | +181 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 16:58 | 26,429 | +245 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 14:55 | 26,184 | +141 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 16:48 | 26,043 | +198 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 16:56 | 25,845 | +199 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 16:00 | 25,646 | +108 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 16:25 | 25,538 | +123 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 18:47 | 25,415 | +148 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 18:48 | 25,267 | +639 |
| 21 Oct 2026, 13:58 | 24,628 | +237 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 07:17 | 24,391 | +73 |
| 19 Oct 2026, 06:59 | 24,318 | first reading |
52 posts held, back to 8 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 132 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 52 (8 July 2026 – 6 November 2026) |
| Views total | 361,730 |
| Reactions total | 440 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Nov 2026, 05:00 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 27 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.
1,162 reactions across 52 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 84.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 980 | 84.3% | |
| 👍 | 101 | 8.69% | |
| 🔥 | 32 | 2.75% | |
| 💯 | 26 | 2.24% | |
| 👏 | 19 | 1.64% | |
| 🏆 | 2 | 0.172% | |
| 🙈 | 2 | 0.172% |
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 52 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 1,162 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 8 July 2026 to 6 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: 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).
花名: #栗子 车牌: @lizi891 坐标: #成都 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤10👍2
📍成都会所半套全套海选 📢成都会所 半套 全套 海选 📢不办卡不充值没有隐形消费 成都100家门店 📍提供位置就近安排 全城预约安排 联系老表预约 @chengdu299BOT 半套均价500~700明码标价具体咨询客服 全套均价1000~1500明码标价具体咨询客服 #成都半套 #成都全套 #成都莞式服务 #成都口爆 #成都95 #成都98 #成都一条龙 #成都海选 🈺业时间:中午2:00-凌晨4:00 情人式服务: 裸吹/共浴/丝袜/按摩 口·真颜值/直度配合 丝袜 制服 鸳鸯戏水 配合度拉满 微信: chengdu050 QQ: 1093656650 预约客服 @chengdu299 会所频道 @zhuhai7188 成都会所—修车觅蚌交流群 https://t.me/CHDKTV
❤5
成都狗哥外围 🥳全网资源最全: 频道只更新部分精选,全成都的外围资源我都有 🥳资源质量最高: 只做精选,质量严选,频道里面的每个妹子都经过验证,有大量反馈,妹子靠谱才选进来,拒绝AI,拒绝假照 🥳优惠活动最多 全成都优惠活动最多的外围,安排给予反馈返现100,满5次第六次八折,满10次,第十一次免费,内部群每周抽奖5-9折扣券,100-888现金红包,免单券 选成都外围,就找成都狗哥,给您带来最好最优惠的外围体验 外围频道: @gougedh_bot 反馈频道: t.me/chengduwaiweibaogao 全国包养 全国外围
❤4
花名: #菜萝莉 车牌: @caicai_798 坐标: #成都 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤15👍3
兄弟们,给大家推荐一家: 成都商K · 情趣换装 ·🥰 真空裸嗨 · 大游戏互动场🥰 🥰 热门玩法节选:高山流水|冰火两重天|鸳鸯戏水|七星瓢虫|汉堡包… 等等几十种福利荤游戏🥰 玩法不止有趣,更是贴身挑逗❗️ 让人欲罢不能❗️流连忘返❗️ 🥰 中场黑灯环节 全程高能释放❗️ 📱沉浸式暗场互动,黑灯劲舞开场,弯腰、翻身、对坐、贴靠——性感身段近在咫尺 每一步走位都在勾引神经,每一处接触都引爆荷尔蒙❗️ 🥰 每日佳丽出勤打底150+ 🚫📛📛📛🅱️✴️🅰️🆚🚫🆑 形象佳、配合度高,现场海选 先选人后消费❗️📱📱📱📱 🔗成都预定 🔗玩法介绍 🔗全国预定 🔗店铺直达 🔗组队群聊 🔗组队规则 📞👍 19382386106 #成都商K #真空战袍游戏场
❤4
花名: #栗子 车牌: @lizi_8880 坐标: #成都 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤27👍9💯1
花名: #甜甜 @tiantian99899 #糯糯 @snuonuoa1 坐标: #重庆 双飞白虎~ 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤34🔥6
花名: #梦小乔 车牌: @SHUNL7 坐标: #成都 福利内容涵盖一部分老师自行提供的照片和视频~ 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤24👍2🔥2👏1
成都•顶级玩家 心无旁骛,专注御姐: 从良家到纯欲,从丰腴到高挑。 每日不定期更新, 颜值只是我们的门槛。 群内所有老师均在成都知名大群上牌,质量靠谱有保证 所有照片人照9分以上! 只做口碑,主打真实。 @djwj028
❤5
花名: #奇奇 车牌: @qqa5888 坐标: #成都 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤24🔥2
花名: #芙芙 车牌: @fufuouo888 坐标: #成都 被芙芙删了好多,白剪辑一个小时了😭 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤36💯4🔥4
花名: #小七 车牌: @xxqq5000 坐标: #成都 谁去把她日叫啊!!! 报告链接 福利内容见评论区❣️
❤20👍3
Showing the 12 most recent of 52 posts we hold for @MmFulidafangsong. 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.
@MmFulidafangsong edited 1 post after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
We recorded 3 posts on @MmFulidafangsong 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.
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.
Named by 4 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 8 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“铲屎官的福利放送” (@MmFulidafangsong), 27,604 subscribers as measured 8 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/MmFulidafangsong.
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.