4 measurements spanning 18 days, net +68. 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 151–239 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
17 Sept 2026, 11:17
229
+10
10 Sept 2026, 05:21
219
+51
31 Aug 2026, 01:35
168
+7
30 Aug 2026, 22:00
161
first reading
Engagement
5 posts held, back to 27 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 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
49.5%
avg views ÷ 229 subscribers
Avg views / post
113
5 posts measured
Reaction rate
13.9%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
5
of 5 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 30 August 2026
Posts held
5 (27 August 2026 – 30 August 2026)
Views total
567
Reactions total
79
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
30 Aug 2026, 22:00 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
79 reactions across 5 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 30.4% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
custom 5233611980266289320
24
30.4%
custom 5406930579427988464
13
16.5%
custom 5433820832797331057
12
15.2%
custom 5406876574509207589
10
12.7%
custom 5195354254134505200
6
7.59%
custom 5197391026410515645
6
7.59%
custom 5213051937460612354
4
5.06%
custom 5406652987101711515
4
5.06%
Custom emoji. Every 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 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 5 of the 5 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 79 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 5 most recent posts we hold, published 27 August 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.
my fashion favourites:
1. морячки, особенно как на фото (сделанные из кожи, телесного цвета и сверху принт под «тату»)
2. реперские шапки
3. челночные сумки с принтами
4. многослойность из маек, надетых друг на друга
5. украшения (кольца, браслеты) сверху перчаток
6. подплечники в виде перьев
7. трусы, торчащие из под штанов, особенно у девушек (у парней это уже «баян», а вот на девушках редко такое вижу)
8. брелоки…
ТОП hot ВЕЩЕЙ, которые могут носить парни — это лонгсливы под футболки.
это — база и классика, которую видели все, НО почему я мало подобного замечаю на улицах?
так нельзя, это незаконно, это разбивает мне сердце…💔
#вещаю
дисклеймер:
данный материал зиждится на научной литературе и собственных анализах, основанных на ней, поэтому рассматривает моду исключительно с экономической точки зрения и метода прибыли.
я намеренно ухожу от эстетических взглядов и баланса, это однобокий анализ, где потребитель ведомый, а не творец.
я думаю, это интересный взгляд, где во главе не чувства, а маркетинг.
именно с такого громкого вопроса я начну свой рассказ.
рассмотрим по порядку развитие и становление моды, но с точки зрения экономики. в пример — цвет «Тиффани».
этап 1: создание религии.
нам продали цвет как символ статуса. зачем? рынок забит. качеством уже не выделиться — все умеют делать хорошо. остаётся уникальность. а человек хочет чувствовать себя особенным — на этом и сыграли. Тиффани не продаёт украшения бе…
Showing the 5 most recent of 5 posts we hold for @dermonddd. 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.
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.
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 17 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“der mond” (@dermonddd), 229 subscribers as measured 17 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/dermonddd.
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.
