Channel
@bogemasranaya
On this record: Topic · Previous handles · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
30,705subscribers
+799 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001324086929 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @bogemasranaya |
| Description | Петроградская шпана, ленинградский панк, питерский сноб @boheme_bot - написать мне Пародийный контент |
| Created | 20 April 2018 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 19 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 34 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 19 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/bogemasranaya |
Marketing & affiliate — 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 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 42% 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.
Recorded in 2019 as “БОГЕМА ПИТЕР$КАЯ” — the title held for this same channel (matched by Telegram id, not by handle) in the Pushshift Telegram Dataset, a third-party archive captured in 2019-2020, years before this register made its own first observation. CC BY 4.0, Baumgartner, Zannettou, Squire & Blackburn (2020), Zenodo. A third party’s dated snapshot, not a measurement this register made itself.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Sept 2026, 11:01 | 30,705 | -22 |
| 16 Sept 2026, 20:56 | 30,727 | -5 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 01:19 | 30,732 | -27 |
| 13 Sept 2026, 13:01 | 30,759 | -20 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 16:35 | 30,779 | +455 |
| 9 Sept 2026, 04:57 | 30,324 | +51 |
| 5 Sept 2026, 20:00 | 30,273 | +186 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 18:14 | 30,087 | +7 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 11:27 | 30,080 | +33 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 09:04 | 30,047 | +65 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 08:26 | 29,982 | +88 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 06:04 | 29,894 | -10 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 08:38 | 29,904 | -3 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 05:25 | 29,907 | -4 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 01:54 | 29,911 | +10 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 00:12 | 29,901 | +36 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 01:58 | 29,865 | +28 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 17:43 | 29,837 | +86 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 04:15 | 29,751 | +99 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 21:33 | 29,652 | first reading |
558 posts held, back to 4 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 74 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 248 of 253 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 24 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 558 (4 August 2026 – 24 September 2026) |
| Views total | 1,230,040 |
| Reactions total | 17,449 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 24 Sept 2026, 21:51 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 24 September 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Measured directly from 96 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.
33,666 reactions across 532 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.5% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 😁 | 13,982 | 41.5% | |
| custom 5282871449810378598 | 8,189 | 24.3% | |
| ❤ | 4,019 | 11.9% | |
| 💯 | 2,819 | 8.37% | |
| 🤡 | 2,595 | 7.71% | |
| 🔥 | 1,734 | 5.15% | |
| 🤔 | 328 | 0.974% |
Custom emoji. One row above is a Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The count beside it is Telegram’s.
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 552 of the 558 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 34,767 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 558 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 24 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @bogemasranaya. 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 558 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 4 August 2026 to 24 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.
Хули вы клоунов ставите, когда начинается пиздорезка под лозунгами «ЖРИ БОГАТЫХ» богатые съёбываются с деньгами, а жрать друг друга остается туземное население, которых потом всякие Тухачевские хуярят артиллерией и боевыми газами.
💯47🤡11❤1🤔1
Я сейчас читаю книгу о голоде после революции Дуглас Смит «Российская Миссия» и пикрил ресентимент это главная причина смерти 20 млн крестьян от голода.
custom 528287144981037859833🤡23💯16❤3
Photo, posted without a caption
😁44custom 528287144981037859811🔥3💯2🤡1
Вы зачем Гузееву своим этим sad рэпом до слез доводите?!
😁27custom 528287144981037859813
Богемята, а каких блогеров на иностранных языках вы смотрите на ютубе? Накидайте всякой годноты в комменты.
принял решение дождаться интервю Самойловой КАС, а потом разъебать по фактам
Оплата улыбкой в Британии be like:
custom 528287144981037859872😁44💯7❤1🤡1
Банк Revolut анонсировал запуск в Британии оплаты улыбкой. Где-то я такое уже видел, даже с тем же названием)) В комментах тут же подтянулись наши и вежливо напомнили, что в Сбере такое работает уже года 3) У пендосов революции в финтехе не получилось, короче. Расходимся.
🤡32😁10❤2💯1
Идея для книги. «Панда-попаданец»: офицер КГБ просыпается в теле китайской панды, отправленной в Мексику для укрепления двусторонних отношений, и обнаруживает, что единственная, кто понимает его по-русски, — престарелая панда Синь-Синь, внучка белого генерала, которая отказывается помогать большевику и демонстративно называет его господином медведем. Попытка передать донесение в Москву заканчивается тем, что сложен…
😁48custom 528287144981037859810❤5🔥5
Sticker, posted without a caption
❤2
Мексиканская панда Синь-Синь — единственная оставшаяся панда которая не принадлежит Китаю. Есть еще две тайваньские, но мы на этом канале придерживаемся политики Единого Китая.
😁59🤡4
Мне нравится думать, что панда — это почётный посол Китая. Пекин владеет всеми пандами в зоопарках по всему миру, и если отношения стран хорошие — он присылает вам такого пушистого посла. Все его содержание, уход и забота ложится на принимающую сторону. Пандята рожденные в неволе это тоже собственность КНР, а если отношения стран портятся, то пушистого посла отзывают на родину. Такая вот милая пушистая дипломатия. На…
❤64🔥8😁6custom 52828714498103785981
Showing the 12 most recent of 558 posts we hold for @bogemasranaya. 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.
@bogemasranaya 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.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republished by 85 registered channels. The 48 listed are the ones that have forwarded the most posts; the rest are counted here but not each listed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Republishes 90 registered channels. The 48 listed are the ones this channel has forwarded most; the rest are counted here but not each listed.
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 20 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.
@bogemasranaya named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
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 7 September 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.
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 26 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. 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.
“БОГЕМА ПИТЕРСКАЯ (светский вестник Москвы)” (@bogemasranaya), 30,705 subscribers as measured 19 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/bogemasranaya.
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.