Gaming — 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 9 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% 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
26 measurements spanning 27 days, net +3,174. 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 134,446–138,572 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 26
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
2 Sept 2026, 10:14
138,096
+3
1 Sept 2026, 13:38
138,093
+46
31 Aug 2026, 14:13
138,047
+41
30 Aug 2026, 16:57
138,006
+61
29 Aug 2026, 19:54
137,945
+87
28 Aug 2026, 20:28
137,858
+178
27 Aug 2026, 20:57
137,680
+454
26 Aug 2026, 18:03
137,226
+262
25 Aug 2026, 15:05
136,964
+91
24 Aug 2026, 11:47
136,873
+61
22 Aug 2026, 22:38
136,812
+54
21 Aug 2026, 12:17
136,758
+56
20 Aug 2026, 13:13
136,702
+44
19 Aug 2026, 15:33
136,658
+62
18 Aug 2026, 14:33
136,596
+89
17 Aug 2026, 11:04
136,507
+124
15 Aug 2026, 18:53
136,383
+153
14 Aug 2026, 09:18
136,230
+235
12 Aug 2026, 23:23
135,995
+336
11 Aug 2026, 22:48
135,659
first reading
Engagement
322 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 57 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
16.2%
avg views ÷ 138,096 subscribers
Avg views / post
22,400
322 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.10%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
322
of 322 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
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 1 September 2026
Posts held
322 (6 August 2026 – 1 September 2026)
Views total
7,211,638
Reactions total
79,412
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
2 Sept 2026, 01:35 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
Video runtime
58m 49s
Average length
1m 35s
Measured directly from 37 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
79,412 reactions across 322 posts, in 44 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 35.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
28,319
35.7%
😁
17,875
22.5%
😭
8,679
10.9%
😱
4,153
5.23%
🤯
3,077
3.87%
🔥
3,005
3.78%
🥰
2,970
3.74%
🤔
2,093
2.64%
❤🔥
1,281
1.61%
👀
1,023
1.29%
🍓
966
1.22%
🌭
875
1.10%
👍
698
0.879%
😢
656
0.826%
🫡
602
0.758%
💊
590
0.743%
🐳
321
0.404%
☃
316
0.398%
💘
279
0.351%
🤩
235
0.296%
24 further kinds
1,399
1.76%
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 322 of the 322 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 79,412 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 322 most recent posts we hold, published 6 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
113
across the posts below
Posts paid on
10
of 322 we hold a reading for · 3%
Most on one post
81
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @Seele_Leaks. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 322 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 6 August 2026 to 1 September 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
不少人想要进一步说明。这里需要指出，从v1开始该数值就固定为 75%，从未改动。你看到的其他任何数值均为不实信息。
A few wanted further clarification. I should note that it has consistently been 75% starting from v1, with zero adjustments. Any other figures you may have come across are misinformation.
有人问这条信息是如何确认的。我们结合解包数据与实机测试完成验证，结论完全可靠。
Some people have asked how this was confirmed. We verified the data through both datamining and in‑game testing, so it is absolutely reliable.
「HSR 4.6」
新 Boss 机制：血脑屏障。对所有非欢愉伤害获得 75% 减伤。网传的80或者85或者88或者90都是错的。
New boss mechanic: Blood‑Brain Barrier. 75% damage reduction against all non‑Elation damage. The rumored values of 80, 85, 88 and 90 are all incorrect.
Showing the 12 most recent of 322 posts we hold for @Seele_Leaks. 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.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 23,108 of 1,629,403 entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
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 17 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.
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.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this 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 28 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.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
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.
Genshin Leakflow @GenshinLeakflow · 43,485 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 51 here — alongside 50 others — read 28 August 2026
Honkai: Star Rail | Миря @honkai_star_rail_leaks · 42,476 Telegram ranks this channel #61 of 66 here — alongside 65 others — read 29 August 2026
This channel appears in 2 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 2 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Seele Leaks” (@Seele_Leaks), 138,096 subscribers as measured 2 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Seele_Leaks.
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.
