0x3786728a2c49c4617bf4fe5bd82b90b6b0df5508 这个逼玩意我看不明白。看k和筹码布局感觉挺nb的 但是也有可能是骗局 你们谁看得明白的话自己研究研究
❤7🤣1
Signed Afeng Feng

Channel
@PEAKFIRE
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
14,655subscribers
+1,289 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001500820649 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @PEAKFIRE |
| Created | Between 1 July 2021 and 28 February 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 19 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 34 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 19 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/PEAKFIRE |
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 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 92% 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Sept 2026, 00:17 | 14,655 | +63 |
| 16 Sept 2026, 13:39 | 14,592 | +47 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 20:20 | 14,545 | +24 |
| 13 Sept 2026, 05:20 | 14,521 | +38 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 06:58 | 14,483 | +65 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 11:41 | 14,418 | +342 |
| 5 Sept 2026, 06:17 | 14,076 | +171 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 14:17 | 13,905 | +62 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 10:12 | 13,843 | +56 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 09:47 | 13,787 | +31 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 09:42 | 13,756 | +17 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 12:26 | 13,739 | -1 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 11:05 | 13,740 | +10 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 14:13 | 13,730 | -5 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 16:37 | 13,735 | +8 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 13:21 | 13,727 | +2 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 10:14 | 13,725 | +24 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 12:54 | 13,701 | +81 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 21:36 | 13,620 | +96 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 13:18 | 13,524 | first reading |
129 posts held, back to 3 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 49 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 61 of 66 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 1 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 129 (3 August 2026 – 1 September 2026) |
| Views total | 187,730 |
| Reactions total | 494 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 2 Sept 2026, 19:34 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.
1,193 reactions across 118 posts, in 20 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 37.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 441 | 37.0% | |
| 🤣 | 257 | 21.5% | |
| 👍 | 153 | 12.8% | |
| 🌚 | 85 | 7.12% | |
| 😁 | 49 | 4.11% | |
| 🔥 | 39 | 3.27% | |
| 🤔 | 34 | 2.85% | |
| 😨 | 29 | 2.43% | |
| 👀 | 26 | 2.18% | |
| 👏 | 26 | 2.18% | |
| 🥰 | 17 | 1.42% | |
| 💔 | 10 | 0.838% | |
| 🙏 | 6 | 0.503% | |
| 🤗 | 6 | 0.503% | |
| ⚡ | 5 | 0.419% | |
| 🐳 | 3 | 0.251% | |
| 💯 | 3 | 0.251% | |
| 🦄 | 2 | 0.168% | |
| ❤🔥 | 1 | 0.084% | |
| 💋 | 1 | 0.084% |
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 121 of the 129 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 1,193 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 129 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 1 September 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.
0x3786728a2c49c4617bf4fe5bd82b90b6b0df5508 这个逼玩意我看不明白。看k和筹码布局感觉挺nb的 但是也有可能是骗局 你们谁看得明白的话自己研究研究
❤7🤣1
Signed Afeng Feng
也会50m以上的。good
🤔2👏1💔1🥰1
Signed Afeng Feng
80m只是开始。800m也许都不足为奇 火星币的叙事太庞大了 远远大于实效性的叙事 火星的叙事可以往后看300年
👏9❤3💔2👍1🔥1
Signed Afeng Feng
最近摸到俩个上所的了。basecat和火星。牛来错过 下一个大概率蓝筹股。 精力实在有限。。。罗宾汉玩不过来 只能每天看看跑出来的 在小仓试水ing 行情真的来了 pvp pve一直是俩个游戏 也可以共存 加油赚钱了
👍9👀1
Signed Afeng Feng
火星看现货了 200-300m那样?
👍6🔥2🌚1
Signed Afeng Feng
火星赚了600 700b一点感觉没有。 内盘pvp赚2000u感觉贼兴奋。亏1000u闹心死
🌚10🔥6🤗6😨6❤2🤣1
Signed Afeng Feng
前几天被拉进去那个cto的群了 带队的人也有能量 也不不少之前eth和base的沉睡巨鲸在车上 他们的目标很一致。三个大所的list 市值100m+ 被感染了。本来心思看个30-40m就撤退了 上限我再拉高一些 他们看100m+我不能比他们高,我就看个50-70 不然这帮逼先跑了我就没钱赚了
❤9😨6🌚5
Signed Afeng Feng
nm的 怎么7m过。没他吗的睡醒啊 狗草的
🥰2
Signed Afeng Feng
3m了 罗宾汉流动性是nb
🥰2
Signed Afeng Feng
要飞
Signed Afeng Feng
前几天朋友喊买了点这个说要努力建设 我随手买了点还真起飞了点 这个逻辑应该是自己弄个台子搭建 然后寻找dev进行飞轮正循环 做事的人还不错 属于孤注一掷了 可以研究研究 前几天很火来的 0x7b630f080807df83908b4ade46ba6396ee66b098 https://x.com/dontblink_cto
❤8👍7
Signed Afeng Feng
一直不死啊 是不是有说法啊 我操
Signed Afeng Feng
Showing the 12 most recent of 129 posts we hold for @PEAKFIRE. 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.
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.
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 6 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 19 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Afeng的加密日记” (@PEAKFIRE), 14,655 subscribers as measured 19 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/PEAKFIRE.
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.