Channel
@andreazhok
On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
11,686subscribers
+115 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001534313638 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @andreazhok |
| Created | 15 August 2021 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 7 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 27 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 7 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/andreazhok |
Politics & activism — 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 10 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 97% 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.
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.
Posts published here appear word for word on 1 other registered channel. They sit inside a group of 3 channels that share the same post bodies with each other. 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.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @andreazhok/875 · this entry14 Jul 2026, 15:57 UTC | @donemanuele_incammino/194915 Jul 2026, 09:35 UTC | 1.00 | 18 hours |
| @andreazhok/876 · this entry14 Jul 2026, 15:57 UTC | @donemanuele_incammino/195015 Jul 2026, 09:36 UTC | 1.00 | 18 hours |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @donemanuele_incammino | 6 (6/6 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 18 hours | this 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 20 comparable posts for this entry, running 12 July 2026 to 7 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.
Across the whole group of 3, the earliest publisher we hold is @andreazhok — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
9,020 average views per post against 11,686 subscribers — an engagement rate of 77.2%. Across the 359 registered channels in the same cohort — 10,031–31,548 subscribers, posting mainly in Italian — the middle half sit between 4.60% and 19.5%, with a median of 10.5%.
| Window | 30 days (10 August 2026 – 9 September 2026) |
|---|---|
| Posts measured | 13 of 13 published in the window (0 exact, 13 rounded by Telegram) |
| Views totalled | 117,210 |
| Mature posts only | 82.1% over 12 posts read at least 24h after publication |
| Subscribers | 11,686 measured 7 September 2026 |
| Cohort | b10000:ita · 359 channels · p10 2.15% · p25 4.60% · p50 10.5% · p75 19.5% · p90 30.6% |
| Position in cohort | 100.000th percentile · 7.3× the cohort median |
| Uncertainty | ±0.253% of the figure, from Telegram’s rounding |
| Post language | Italian · 100.0% of the window’s posts |
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal. A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the keys clone_source · err_high, last confirmed 9 September 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.
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 2 other registered channels, 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Sept 2026, 07:40 | 11,686 | +5 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 15:36 | 11,681 | +8 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 02:28 | 11,673 | -2 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 23:34 | 11,675 | +2 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 01:39 | 11,673 | +3 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 03:03 | 11,670 | +5 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 00:54 | 11,665 | +12 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 03:03 | 11,653 | +7 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 23:57 | 11,646 | +7 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 02:03 | 11,639 | +3 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 02:54 | 11,636 | -2 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 03:16 | 11,638 | +6 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 20:13 | 11,632 | +20 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 03:08 | 11,612 | +6 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 21:37 | 11,606 | +4 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 19:44 | 11,602 | +2 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 16:55 | 11,600 | -5 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 18:15 | 11,605 | +4 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 22:03 | 11,601 | -3 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 15:43 | 11,604 | first reading |
36 posts held, back to 12 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 46 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 2 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 36 (12 July 2026 – 2 September 2026) |
| Views total | 117,210 |
| Reactions total | — |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 3 Sept 2026, 00:38 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.
Ieri a Pietralata, periferia di Roma, una famiglia è stata uccisa dallo stato italiano. Quello stato che ha come ragione prima di esistenza la difesa e protezione dei propri cittadini, e che non trova mai soldi per la vita, ma con facilità e abbondanza per la morte. Quella famiglia, padre, madre, una bambina gravemente disabile, lasciata con supporti pubblici ridicoli, abbandonata di fatto a sé stessa, non ce l’ha f…
Solo che è ben difficile che possa accadere niente di diverso se i progressisti studiati ti spiegano che il problema è che non c’è abbastanza mercato, che non abbiamo “razionalizzato” il mercato del lavoro, che la colpa è nostra, che non abbiamo fatto abbastanza austerity, che non siamo stati abbastanza aperti verso chi ci raccoglie i pomodori e ci paga la pensione, che non c’è abbastanza Europa, che non ci siamo int…
Ieri Stefano Bonaccini (ex presidente del PD) ha esternato come segue: «Il voto al primo e al secondo Trump, il voto per la Brexit - qualche anno fa - il voto in Germania a destra, quello alla Le Pen, quello in Italia, a Meloni e prima a Salvini e oggi forse a Vannacci - è un voto che vede in maniera maggioritaria il voto di chi ha poco studiato, di chi vive nelle aree interne o nelle periferie delle città e, come di…
IL NUOVO PARADIGMA Dal 2020 l’Occidente è entrato in una logica di guerra, con elementi di un’economia di guerra e una gestione di tipo bellico della politica interna, dei media e della politica estera. Le origini dell’ingresso del paradigma bellico nel mondo occidentale sono abbastanza semplici da capire: 1) L’Occidente a guida americana ha perso la capacità di imporre le proprie “ragioni di scambio” a livello in…
Concludendo, siamo davvero di fronte alla fine di quel fenomeno culturale e sociale che ha preso il nome di “woke”? Ma figuriamoci! Il fatto stesso che si possa pensare che un piccolo cambiamento di parole d’ordine strumentali, in chiave elettorale, possa decretarne la fine è l’indicazione più chiara che chi lo pensa non ne ha percepito la radicalità e profondità. Fino a ieri l’ordine di scuderia era: “Non esiste alc…
Questa soggettivizzazione del diritto e delle pretese di tutela ha aperto il Vaso di Pandora per cui ogni persuasione soggettiva, che sia solidamente fondata o che sia il frutto di un fragile convincimento divenuto un’idea fissa, comunque poteva e doveva ricevere una tutela normativa. Abbiamo così straziato la lingua italiana con un profluvio di goffaggini prive di senso per andar dietro a rivendicazioni fondate sul …
Spesso sul tema “woke”, “politicamente corretto” ecc. viene fuori spesso a sinistra l’argomento “non è mica detto che diritti civili e diritti sociali non possano svilupparsi assieme”. Questo argomento, apparentemente sensato, è in verità un completo marasma. È semplicemente falso equiparare le tematiche woke con i “diritti civili”. Moltissimi diritti civili si sono sviluppati benissimo a fianco dei diritti sociali p…
“IL WOKE È MORTO, VIVA IL WOKE!” Si stanno celebrando in questi giorni i funerali del “woke”. Come sempre gli ordini di scuderia sono partiti dagli USA dove l’icona progressista Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, in vista dei prossimi appuntamenti elettorali, ha fatto uno spostamento tattico per recuperare il voto popolare perduto dai progressisti: “Controordine compagni, ci siamo concentrati sul woke mentre abbiamo perso co…
Comunque la miseria umana di gente che aggredisce una famiglia che ha appena perso una figlia è allucinante, lascia proprio senza fiato. Il gusto del frustrato di poter dire "Haha, se lo è voluto, ben gli sta!" è tutto lì, squadernato davanti ai nostri occhi. Incidentalmente, siccome il vaccino per la difterite non mi pare sia obbligatorio né in Germania, né in Spagna, né in Portogallo, né in Austria, né in Svezia,…
Rimbomba su giornali e social media il caso di una bambina di 4 anni morta forse di difterite. Sul caso specifico c’è poco da dire finché non verranno fatti i dovuti accertamenti da parte delle autorità competenti. Più interessante è notare il senso dell’operazione di roboante sciacallaggio, avviata da giornali e telegiornali sul corpo ancora caldo di una bambina. L’oggetto dell’operazione è il fatto che la bambin…
Ieri You Tube ha rimosso il canale del regista serbo Emir Kusturica (30.000 iscritti, 10 milioni di visualizzazioni). Il canale è stato bloccato senza avvisi, ammonimenti, notifiche o motivazioni manifeste. Naturalmente tutti sanno che il motivo della rimozione sono le posizioni culturalmente filorusse di Kusturica. Un click dal nulla di un’azienda di telecomunicazioni privata e un famoso cineasta internazionale p…
Israele e USA hanno una notoria e capillare capacità di modellare la realtà percepita. Larry Sanger, cofondatore di Wikipedia, ha rivelato come la CIA abbia operato una sistematica revisione delle pagine di Wikipedia, per anni, nell’interesse del governo USA, di “governi amici” e di alcune corporations. Sappiamo che Israele sta allocando per le campagne propagandistiche (hasbara) enormi investimenti. Alla luce del …
Showing the 12 most recent of 36 posts we hold for @andreazhok. 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.
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.
Named by 2 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.
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 15 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 7 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Andrea Zhok” (@andreazhok), 11,686 subscribers as measured 7 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/andreazhok.
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.