媒体提问的第一个问题我就不喜欢,在英伟达工作的人思想觉悟应该已经不太支持他进行生孩子这种娱乐活动了。。。
🤡4💩2custom 49270891794871119621
Signed 网友 早顺苗

Channel
@chomebanchigo
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
6,266subscribers
+5,475 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003945499733 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @chomebanchigo |
| Description | 聊天群被Bot誤Ban找管理。 地鶏組:https://t.me/Jidorigumi 助推:https://t.me/boost/chomebanchigo 日家聊天群:https://t.me/Ribenzhijia 浪人新聞:https://t.me/langrenshudong |
| Created | Between 1 April 2026 and 6 August 2026 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 3 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 16 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 3 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/chomebanchigo |
Politics & activism — 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 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 70% 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 the other topics.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 3 Nov 2026, 22:51 | 6,266 | -29 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 06:19 | 6,295 | -47 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 11:19 | 6,342 | -68 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 20:37 | 6,410 | -97 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 22:50 | 6,507 | -140 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 12:06 | 6,647 | -133 |
| 17 Oct 2026, 16:09 | 6,780 | -107 |
| 14 Oct 2026, 12:30 | 6,887 | -384 |
| 9 Sept 2026, 12:19 | 7,271 | +55 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 13:58 | 7,216 | +6,268 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 23:24 | 948 | +52 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 15:42 | 896 | +58 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 12:58 | 838 | +41 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 03:43 | 797 | +6 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 15:32 | 791 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 11:06 | 791 | first reading |
82 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 5 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 5 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 82 (6 August 2026 – 5 November 2026) |
| Views total | 7,805 |
| Reactions total | 691 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 5 Nov 2026, 13:08 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 5 November 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 7 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.
807 reactions across 82 posts, in 31 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 39.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 😁 | 316 | 39.2% | |
| custom 4927089179487111962 | 125 | 15.5% | |
| 🤣 | 58 | 7.19% | |
| 🗿 | 50 | 6.20% | |
| 🤡 | 44 | 5.45% | |
| 👍 | 34 | 4.21% | |
| 💅 | 27 | 3.35% | |
| 🎉 | 24 | 2.97% | |
| 🌚 | 16 | 1.98% | |
| 💩 | 16 | 1.98% | |
| 🥰 | 14 | 1.73% | |
| 🤮 | 11 | 1.36% | |
| ❤ | 10 | 1.24% | |
| 🙈 | 6 | 0.743% | |
| 🙉 | 6 | 0.743% | |
| 🥱 | 6 | 0.743% | |
| 🦄 | 6 | 0.743% | |
| 🌭 | 4 | 0.496% | |
| 👏 | 4 | 0.496% | |
| 👻 | 4 | 0.496% | |
| 11 further kinds | 26 | 3.22% |
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 82 of the 82 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 807 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 82 most recent posts we hold, published 6 August 2026 to 5 November 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’s own ‘edited’ marker: 6 of 66 posts held from the last 30 days (9.09%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
媒体提问的第一个问题我就不喜欢,在英伟达工作的人思想觉悟应该已经不太支持他进行生孩子这种娱乐活动了。。。
🤡4💩2custom 49270891794871119621
Signed 网友 早顺苗
“所以我是想问,你是准备了然后完全在心里面,都没有找人讨论,还是现在突然提到要急忙搬出来???”——沈伯洋评蒋万安
custom 49270891794871119623💩2🤡1
Signed 网友 早顺苗
“你猜拿真金白银下注的,会不会拿真金白银去支持?你再猜拿真金白银下注的,会不会真的认识哪些花大钱去支持的人”
👍2🤣2😴2🗿1custom 49270891794871119621
Signed 网友 早顺苗
大家都是嘴上支持的,你还真入局啊 不得不说能全押错也是一种本事
😁3custom 49270891794871119623🤣2🎉1
Signed 氷川 紗夜 (想吃🍟)
已读懂
🎉3🤣1😁1custom 49270891794871119621
Signed 氷川 紗夜 (想吃🍟)
Photo, posted without a caption
😨3🗿2🤩1
Signed てト
沈伯洋学了塔罗牌。。。大扣分。。。
🤡3💅2custom 49270891794871119621
Signed 网友 早顺苗
“乱世用重典”。。。 蒋万安啊,你要是真认为你治下的台北是得用重典的“乱世”,你就“下去休息休息吧”,台北是什么乱世我请问了?台北但凡有一丁点战争的风险那也是因为你们蓝营对不起台湾人乱和共产党搞绥靖,这话是这么用的吗?感觉不如维尼。。。文学造纸。。。人家告诉你了他沈伯洋作为立法院的立委已经做了能做的事情你问他为啥受害者家属还是那么难受,那他妈不是因为你国民党管台北的时候没处理好吗???到底谁是市长谁是立委我请问了
custom 49270891794871119624🗿1🤡1
Signed 网友 早顺苗
查理柯克:已气活
👻4😁3🗿1
Signed 氷川 紗夜 (想吃🍟)
蒋万安第三四轮回答怎么还好意思提毒油事件哦 毒油那中联重科那个倒霉蛋不是你们国民党自己知道要爆了换了个民进党的人上来顶包的吗?“小报告不你打的吗”,这会儿想起来拿着自己找的麻烦跟民进党讨说法了你要干啥啊?蒋万安问立法院为什么不做事,我请问了立法院在台北干不了事情不就是你们这帮国民党反动派导致的吗???苯并吡出现的原因应该把洪尧昆叫来问啊,台湾的政客只需要会甩锅就能进国民党吗?那国民党赢哪怕任何一个乡镇都是完全不可接受的啊。。。还有蒋万安一再说什么沈伯洋不了解这不了解那,我请问了到底谁是台北市长哦??? 还有我请问你蒋万安:提问的目的是什么?是铺陈你自己和国民党的政策还是质疑对方的纲领?是显示谁适合成为台北市市长还是显示谁一窍不通四六不懂?中央的议事原则和决策方案好像不是你蒋万安开始竞选以后才敲定的吧?那你凭什么质疑连立法院院长都没有质疑的事项呢?你的质疑是希望证明什么希望达成什么目的?你这个质疑一旦出现就只能证明你的无知。。。…
custom 49270891794871119623🗿1🤡1😁1
Signed 网友 早顺苗
Photo, posted without a caption
🗿4😁4🌚1
Signed 氷川 紗夜 (想吃🍟)
哦哦哦哦哦哦哦哦哦川普输咯俄罗斯滚蛋咯!
👏3🗿3🤡2😁1custom 49270891794871119621
Signed 网友 早顺苗
Showing the 12 most recent of 82 posts we hold for @chomebanchigo. 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.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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.
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 3 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“日本の家” (@chomebanchigo), 6,266 subscribers as measured 3 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/chomebanchigo.
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.