这逻辑跟去菜市场买菜按开豪车程度收菜钱没区别,这些人跟意淫亿万富翁天天吃海参鲍鱼满汉全席是一波人。因为有钱所以一个不值钱的东西就该花5000万??? 景甜的价值远远大于她要的,这是什么逻辑?她怎么知道景有多大价值呢?等墙国男人都觉醒了,蝈女只能去卖的时候,她们就知道自己值多少钱了。

Channel
墙国之音
@chinafounder
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
14,936subscribers
-149 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1001142168383 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @chinafounder |
| Created | Between 1 July 2016 and 29 February 2020 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 6 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 27 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 6 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/chinafounder |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 6 Sept 2026, 16:17 | 14,936 | -15 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 06:40 | 14,951 | -2 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 18:19 | 14,953 | -2 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 13:57 | 14,955 | -3 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 11:58 | 14,958 | -5 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 10:44 | 14,963 | -4 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 12:34 | 14,967 | -6 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 12:12 | 14,973 | -12 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 08:45 | 14,985 | +6 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 05:58 | 14,979 | -4 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 02:27 | 14,983 | -16 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 14:37 | 14,999 | -12 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 22:36 | 15,011 | -3 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 20:42 | 15,014 | -7 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 20:53 | 15,021 | -6 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 20:55 | 15,027 | -10 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 18:25 | 15,037 | -13 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 15:35 | 15,050 | -4 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 13:45 | 15,054 | -7 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 16:22 | 15,061 | first reading |
Engagement
80 posts held, back to 13 June 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 54 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
- ERR · 30 days
- 5.53%
- avg views ÷ 14,936 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 826
- 61 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- 0.295%
- reactions ÷ views · ER floor
- Posts in window
- 61
- of 80 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. It is computed over the 31 of 61 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 30 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 80 (13 June 2026 – 30 August 2026) |
| Views total | 50,400 |
| Reactions total | 83 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 3 Sept 2026, 11:01 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
- 4m 31s
- Average length
- 54s
Measured directly from 5 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
221 reactions across 44 posts, in 15 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 27.1% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 60 | 27.1% | |
| ❤ | 42 | 19.0% | |
| 😁 | 35 | 15.8% | |
| 🤣 | 22 | 9.95% | |
| 💩 | 14 | 6.33% | |
| 👏 | 11 | 4.98% | |
| 💯 | 9 | 4.07% | |
| 🤮 | 9 | 4.07% | |
| 🤡 | 8 | 3.62% | |
| 🤬 | 5 | 2.26% | |
| 🤨 | 2 | 0.905% | |
| 😱 | 1 | 0.452% | |
| 🤪 | 1 | 0.452% | |
| 🤯 | 1 | 0.452% | |
| 🥰 | 1 | 0.452% |
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 48 of the 80 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 221 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 80 most recent posts we hold, published 13 June 2026 to 30 August 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.
Recent posts
习近平一手打造的性压抑社会是对墙国男性的另类阉割,也是维稳的一种手段罢了,让低智商蝈女操控大部分蝈男,然后共产党再操纵低智蝈女,比直接控制所有蝈男要轻松容易得多。几千年了,一旦男性群体凝聚力形成,改朝换代那是分分钟的事儿。
💯1
80后是老龟登,90后是最龟的一代。但深层问题是墙国经济下行大环境下的债务,蝈女各种提前透支的债务要找龟蝻化债。
蝈籹对别人的钱总是很慷慨,对自己的钱就抠抠搜搜。所以被蝈籹控制的龟蝻不值得同情,因为这种籹人普遍智商低下。
景甜对给她背锅的财务,连8万块都不肯给......有多少蝈籹不是靠男人给它转移支付的?捞女花金主爸爸的钱眼都不眨,花自己的钱斤斤计较。
蝈籹这群人用别人的钱装逼最狠了,自己掏79块钱都受不了。在蝈籹的认知里面,实在不行就随便找个有钱人嫁了吧,所以三千万少,当然79块钱的眉笔仍然很贵!
一个妓女敲诈花钱买性的富豪, 一群人在那边当做谈恋爱分析。
蝈籹唯恐捞不到,捞的不够,捞的被要回去,小仙女们连5万美元的外汇管制额度的存款都没有...大钱都没见过的人,指望它们能有什么概念,而且普遍智商都不高,玩的还是江西彩礼那一套,穷则38.8万,富则百分比...... 对于这种脑子不好的蠢货迎合它们就完了,直接就“对对对,5000万美金真不多!“完事儿了
事实是,有这种想法的人根本赚不到85亿。墙国捞女基数大得吓人,满脑子用身体爆男人金币。
话说回来,有一说一,景甜最起码不是猪头焖子
😁2
只会意淫,越没有什么越吹什么,不说5000万了,给她鸽鸽投500块抖加试试看吧
😁2
物化女性的往往就是女性自己,恰好又赶上习近平性压抑时代,无解。
Showing the 12 most recent of 80 posts we hold for @chinafounder. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@chinafounder 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.
- First edit seen
- 9 August 2026
- Most recent edit
- 9 August 2026
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 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.
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.
@XueXi_China · 87,390
Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 48 here — alongside 47 others — read 17 August 2026
@newszg_official · 164,531
Telegram ranks this channel #22 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 12 August 2026
@TwtVideoOfChina · 73,826
Telegram ranks this channel #43 of 54 here — alongside 53 others — read 20 August 2026
This channel appears in 3 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 6 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“墙国之音” (@chinafounder), 14,936 subscribers as measured 6 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/chinafounder.
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.