12 measurements spanning 35 days, net +129. 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 8,938–9,117 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
10 Sept 2026, 01:19
9,096
+30
4 Sept 2026, 08:18
9,066
+16
1 Sept 2026, 05:39
9,050
+9
29 Aug 2026, 08:43
9,041
+7
26 Aug 2026, 00:44
9,034
+18
22 Aug 2026, 16:14
9,016
+20
19 Aug 2026, 02:45
8,996
+15
16 Aug 2026, 04:15
8,981
+12
12 Aug 2026, 08:05
8,969
+10
9 Aug 2026, 05:52
8,959
-9
6 Aug 2026, 12:20
8,968
+1
6 Aug 2026, 06:45
8,967
first reading
Engagement
30 posts held, back to 11 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 31 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
53.2%
avg views ÷ 9,096 subscribers
Avg views / post
4,840
7 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.53%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
7
of 30 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 28 August 2026
Posts held
30 (11 July 2026 – 28 August 2026)
Views total
33,850
Reactions total
857
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
28 Aug 2026, 15:40 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.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
37m 14s
Average length
18m 37s
Measured directly from 2 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
2,928 reactions across 29 posts, in 28 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 34.5% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
1,010
34.5%
🔥
484
16.5%
❤🔥
413
14.1%
custom 5224514221626131562
206
7.04%
custom 5224256742631701388
112
3.83%
custom 5220164480612207058
102
3.48%
🏆
83
2.83%
🤗
80
2.73%
🤪
66
2.25%
💋
59
2.02%
👏
44
1.50%
🥰
40
1.37%
✍
34
1.16%
🤝
33
1.13%
🤔
28
0.956%
🍌
25
0.854%
😢
23
0.786%
🍓
19
0.649%
🫡
19
0.649%
🤩
15
0.512%
8 further kinds
33
1.13%
Custom emoji. 3 of the rows above are 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 counts beside them are 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 30 of the 30 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 2,971 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 30 most recent posts we hold, published 11 July 2026 to 28 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
8
across the posts below
Posts paid on
6
of 30 we hold a reading for · 20%
Most on one post
2
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @debatekek. 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 30 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 11 July 2026 to 28 August 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.
Почему все вокруг такие токсичные и агрессивные.
Обесценивание, зависть, хамство, постоянная критика, сравнение вас с кем угодно вокруг — это база отечественного воспитания, карьеры и отношений.
В школе вас всегда сравнивают с Васей или Машей. А если вы сами Вася или Саша, то с самым лучшим своим результатом. Четверок не достаточно, надо иметь пятерки. У меня буквально дома спрашивали почему у меня тупо пять, а не …
Как не надо знакомиться.
Я вчера вел дебаты на конференции у Антона Назарова (я забыл делать кружки и пост об этом). Но основная моя задача была— это пообщаться со спикерами и договориться о совместных проектах.
Собственно, как и у большинства, кто там был. Ведь конференция, корпоратив, любая сходка людей— это хороший повод познакомиться и выстроить связи. Да, как посвят в унике у перваков.
У меня получилось хорош…
Можно ли тренироваться в дебатах и переговорах с ИИ?
И да, и нет. Вопрос задачи.
Больше 70% людей приходят на курс по коммуникации, потому что хотят научиться справляться со стрессом во время споров или защиты позиции. На дебаты ко мне многие ходят, чтобы справляться со стрессом, когда время на ответ ограничено.
Вчера машина не хотела называть меня ничтожным и бездарным. А еще не хотела убивать новорожденных. Соев…
Спорю с Клодом об эвтаназии. Должна она быть разрешенной или нет.
Это тестовый видак, сначала хотел проверить пишется ли звук или нет, но чет немного увлекся. Для ютубика настрою получше.
Мне кажется, что он очень разумно и толково все делал, только ему нужно чуть больше своего.
А самое важное, что мы не спорим о базовых бессмысленных вещах, а переходим на седьмой уровень ценностного/принципиального спор, игнориру…
Хотите мои дебаты против моего друга Клода?
Я прямо сейчас с ним сражался по поводу смертной казни и задушил его. Он реально умный и толковый и, в отличии от кожанных мешков, не начинает заниматься ментальной гимнастикой, вилять и крутить жопой. Доволен 10/10.
Пишите в комментах темы, на которые я с ним буду спорить и будет видачок в ютуб.
А мб и контент на стрим.
Сегодня в 21:00 смотрим жидчайшие дебаты Карабаса и Около Шиза.
Разберем самые очевидные сексистские аргументы и посмотрим, что на них можно ответить. Ну и пиво буду пить безалкогольное.
https://youtube.com/live/YdoO8qzUVno?feature=share
Почему люди не покупают выгодные вещи
Если многих из вас спросить, почему вы купили себе айфон или мак, вы начнёте заниматься ментальной гимнастикой, пытаясь оправдать свою покупку.
Расскажете про новую камеру, про чип, про батарею, про какую-то муть, которую вам с умным лицом уже рассказал чёрт со сцены. Будете говорить языком первичных выгод, потому что хотите быть взрослым и рациональным человеком, который трати…
Почему снятие Яблока с выборов — хорошо?
Да, я фанат поиска хорошего в плохом.
Яблоко— это партия ребят, которые набирают каплю голосов, валяются в конце, толку от них никакого. Ну черти и черти.
У них всегда была унылая компания нищая, унылые обещания и планы по действию. Просто компрессор, гоняющий воздух как и любая другая партия. Будем делать хорошо, плохо делать не будем. Ну и бороться с коррупцией будем. А ч…
Что делать, если перед вами ставят ультиматум и причем тут выученная беспомощность.
Давайте я вам скажу, что ни того, ни другого не существует.
Наверняка вам в детстве родители ставили выбор без выбора: «доешь суп или не выйдешь из-за стола, или не получишь сладкого». В школе вам просто говорили, что вы будете делать, не сильно заботясь, что вы думаете по этому поводу. Вы же ребенок, а значит с вами можно делать вс…
Шестой поток курса по коммуникации открыт. Регистрация до 24 августа.
Занятия начинаются на последней неделе августа.
Формат
6 недель, 2 занятия в неделю по 3 часа.
Расписание: либо утро выходных, либо будний вечер + утро выходного.
Онлайн с разбором ваших ситуаций, ролевыми упражнениями и практикой на живых кейсах.
Записи и конспекты каждого занятия.
Домашние задания для закрепления.
Программа курса (12 заня…
Как органично просить повышения на работе, если вам подняли нагрузку.
Вчера на консультации была банальная ситуация. Человек работал и попутно менторил коллег, плюс иногда подменял начальника.
Пришел с отпуска и все, что было раньше добровольным, стало теперь частью его работы. Зарплату при этом не подняли.
И вот мы сидели, чесали репу, думая, что с этим делать.
Прийти и попросить больше денег? Ну тебя пошлют, п…
Как ваша мягкотелость проигрывает вам возможности на работе.
Представьте, что вы аналитик, который круто сделал свою работу и сделал отличный аналитический материал, который ваш руководитель презентовал клиенту. Клиенту очень понравилось, сделка заключилась, начальство выписало премию.
Вы очевидно рассчитываете на премию, потому что вы приложили много усилий и часть результата— ваша заслуга. Но ваш руководитель счи…
Showing the 12 most recent of 30 posts we hold for @debatekek. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
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.
А вы бы бросили своего партнера ради кого-то супер крутого.
Да, я бы бросил своего партнера17%
Нет, я бы не бросил своего партнера83%
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 30 most recent posts we hold, published 11 July 2026 to 28 August 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
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 3 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.
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 10 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Дебатляндия” (@debatekek), 9,096 subscribers as measured 10 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/debatekek.
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.