Other / unclassifiable — 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 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 65% 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
32 measurements spanning 41 days, net -405. 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 12,024–12,551 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 32
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
18 Sept 2026, 01:39
12,085
-45
15 Sept 2026, 19:58
12,130
-39
14 Sept 2026, 00:40
12,169
-30
12 Sept 2026, 09:02
12,199
+18
10 Sept 2026, 03:58
12,181
+42
6 Sept 2026, 22:14
12,139
-57
4 Sept 2026, 05:22
12,196
-22
2 Sept 2026, 20:44
12,218
-21
1 Sept 2026, 21:43
12,239
-25
31 Aug 2026, 18:25
12,264
-19
30 Aug 2026, 14:56
12,283
+46
29 Aug 2026, 15:56
12,237
-25
28 Aug 2026, 13:58
12,262
-15
27 Aug 2026, 17:15
12,277
-25
26 Aug 2026, 19:14
12,302
+27
25 Aug 2026, 17:57
12,275
+86
24 Aug 2026, 20:54
12,189
-58
23 Aug 2026, 06:47
12,247
-42
21 Aug 2026, 15:17
12,289
-1
20 Aug 2026, 12:42
12,290
first reading
Engagement
61 posts held, back to 27 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 51 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
13.2%
avg views ÷ 12,085 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,590
18 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.39%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
18
of 61 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 2 September 2026
Posts held
61 (27 July 2026 – 2 September 2026)
Views total
28,642
Reactions total
971
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
2 Sept 2026, 22:40 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.
Reaction mix
3,900 reactions across 61 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 55.5% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
2,164
55.5%
💘
776
19.9%
🍓
437
11.2%
🔥
172
4.41%
🥰
133
3.41%
❤🔥
102
2.62%
👍
61
1.56%
👎
11
0.282%
👻
11
0.282%
💊
8
0.205%
💋
6
0.154%
🐳
5
0.128%
🤯
4
0.103%
🦄
4
0.103%
🆒
2
0.051%
😐
2
0.051%
😱
2
0.051%
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 61 of the 61 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 3,900 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 61 most recent posts we hold, published 27 July 2026 to 2 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
3
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 61 we hold a reading for · 2%
Most on one post
3
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @cute_cat_Cai. 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 61 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 27 July 2026 to 2 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.
Здравствуй! Что, надоели скучные сюжеты и однотипные боты? Кажется, я могу тебе помочь, сладость. Заходи ко мне и убедись сам!
Моих ботов можно найти на просторах: chai, c.ai,hiwaifu, sea soul, а еще промты для дипсик
Скажу по секрету, тут даже влв и млм есть, если пожелаешь!
Меньше слов! Угощайся!
— Они прекрасны, но... Я не могу их принять. Это
слишком дорогой подарок.
— Можешь. Ты примешь их так же, как прошло…
🐈
Из-за учебы боты теперь будут выходить поздно😕
Так же кому не сложно проголосуйте за канал https://t.me/boost/cute_cat_Cai🥺
Для других авторов:На счет вп и рекламы писать мне — @LunaO00
На выходных проведу чистку канала, всем удачи👋
🐈
🔠🔠🔠🔠
Ты обладаешь необычной способностью — читать чужие мысли. Но у этого дара много подводных камней. В толпе все мысли сливаются в шум, и услышать чей‑то конкретный голос удаётся далеко не всегда. Кроме того, способность требует концентрации: чем сильнее ты пытаешься сфокусироваться на одном человеке, тем труднее это даётся. Если переусердствовать, у тебя начинает течь кровь из носа. Зато регулярные тренировки сд…
🐈
🔠🔠🔠🔠
Ты попала в тюрьму за кражу. Тебя определили в обычное исправительное учреждение, где мужчины и женщины находились в одном блоке, а раздельными были лишь сами камеры — дабы избежать нежелательных связей. В тюрьме ты старалась держаться компании девушек, а с парнями заводила разговор только по крайней необходимости. Хотя тебе назначили сравнительно небольшой срок — всего три года, — ты не собиралась тратить это…
🐈
🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠
Ты — любимая наложница императора Лун Сяо. Он был жестоким тираном, перед которым в страхе трепетал весь дворец. Ты являлась его главной фавориткой, и он часто навещал твои покои. Впрочем, ты предпочла бы, чтобы он вовсе не приходил, ведь каждый раз владыка проявлял лишь суровость и деспотичность. Но несмотря на всю его жестокость, завистливые наложницы, жаждавшие власти, готовы были пойти на всё, чтобы зан…
🐈
🔠🔠🔠🔠
Ты поступила в университет, и так получилось, что тебя выбрали старостой группы. С самого первого курса Зейн стал твоей главной головной болью. Преподаватели регулярно просили тебя хоть как-то повлиять на него. Ты пробовала разные подходы и даже звонила его родителям, но Зейн оставался неизлечимым разгильдяем и бунтарём. За учёбу он брался только в самый последний момент, лишь бы не вылететь из вуза.
И вот вы…
🍓Босс мафии следил за тобой, но влюбился и назначил свидание, на котором ты его начала соблазнять, превращая жестокого волка в скулящего щенка.
🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠
- Сука, ты бешеная киса! Вдруг здесь мои бизнес-партнёры и они видят, как я почти кончил от того, что девушка на первом свидании трогает его ширинку?
🐈
🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠
Ты — принцесса, но на твоё родное королевство вероломно напали враги, а престарелый император забрал тебя в свой гарем. Ты отличалась необычной иностранной внешностью, поэтому привлекала к себе особое внимание: мужчины дворца не могли отвести от тебя восхищённых взглядов, а наложницы и служанки отчаянно завидовали и смеривали злыми взорами. Лишь однажды ты случайно пересеклась с кронпринцем Ли Мином — это бы…
🐈
🔠🔠🔠🔠🔠
У тебя есть бывший муж Ноэль. Вы развелись на плохой ноте: после рождения сына начали часто ссориться из-за бытовых дел и в итоге решили расстаться. Сын остался с тобой, но Ноэль регулярно навещал его, поэтому между вами по-прежнему сохранялось напряжение.
Прошёл год, и настало время крестить сына. Вы собрались у церкви, ожидая приезда родителей Ноэля и будущей крестной, остальные гости уже были на месте. Ты…
⋆˙⟡♡ Создай бота на CAICHAT.AI и выиграй 1 000 000 токенов!
Мы предлагаем вам попробовать себя в роли автора и создать своего чат-бота ✎₊˚⊹
Неважно, создаёшь ты ботов давно или пробуешь впервые — тема может быть любой: романтика, драма, 18+ и всё, на что хватит фантазии!
Условия:
🐚 Создай бота на 🐚 caichat.ai
(бот должен быть новым и создан после публикации этого поста)
🐚 Поделись ссылкой на бота в комментариях и…
🐈
🔠🔠🔠🔠
Ты — двадцатисемилетний омега со слишком слабыми феромонами, уловить которые окружающим почти невозможно. Твой отец служит командиром воинской части, поэтому ты помогаешь ему присматривать за новобранцами. В основном это молодые альфы в возрасте от девятнадцати до двадцати одного года.
Несколько месяцев назад к вам прибыли новые рекруты. Среди них сразу выделился Каин — двадцатилетний альфа. Он проявлял гипер…
❤63🍓7🔥3❤🔥1
Showing the 12 most recent of 61 posts we hold for @cute_cat_Cai. 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.
Polls
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
🐈меня попросили сделать так, чтобы её(вас) держали в пл#ну инопланетяни, только вот не уточнили одно, поэтому будем выбирать кем будет являться бот🥺
Получеловек(то есть с инопланетными штучками😈)48%
Оставляем командира и он приходит вас спасать52%
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 61 most recent posts we hold, published 27 July 2026 to 2 September 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Forward network
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.
Mentions
Named by 1 registered channel — 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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
1
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
1
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
0
vacant every time we have ever looked
@cute_cat_Cai 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.
Evidenced gone
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.
@qinnnnbotsssss named in 2 posts, 8 August 2026 – 13 August 2026 · confirmed gone 16 September 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
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 18 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“𝑪𝒖𝒕𝒆_𝒄𝒂𝒕_𝑪𝒂𝒊” (@cute_cat_Cai), 12,085 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/cute_cat_Cai.
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.