Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Диджитал в HR

Channel

Диджитал в HR

@digit_HR

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Advertising · Posts · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

7,266subscribers

-22 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001160640702
TypeChannel
Username@digit_HR
CreatedBetween 1 April 2018 and 31 July 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live1 September 2026
Measurements held10
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 1 September 2026
On Telegramt.me/digit_HR

Growth

7,2667,2897,277.56 August 2026 — 7,288 subscribers7 August 2026 — 7,288 subscribers7 August 2026 — 7,289 subscribers10 August 2026 — 7,278 subscribers14 August 2026 — 7,279 subscribers17 August 2026 — 7,273 subscribers23 August 2026 — 7,271 subscribers27 August 2026 — 7,268 subscribers29 August 2026 — 7,267 subscribers1 September 2026 — 7,266 subscribers6 August 20261 September 2026
10 measurements spanning 26 days, net -22. 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 7,263–7,292 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
1 Sept 2026, 15:347,266-1
29 Aug 2026, 19:137,267-1
27 Aug 2026, 05:057,268-3
23 Aug 2026, 22:177,271-2
17 Aug 2026, 18:157,273-6
14 Aug 2026, 17:177,279+1
10 Aug 2026, 21:567,278-11
7 Aug 2026, 16:177,289+1
7 Aug 2026, 00:007,288no change
6 Aug 2026, 23:597,288first reading

Engagement

34 posts held, back to 17 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 13 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
2.98%
avg views ÷ 7,266 subscribers
Avg views / post
217
17 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.893%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
17
of 34 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 11 of 17 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 20 August 2026
Posts held34 (17 July 202620 August 2026)
Views total3,687
Reactions total23
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken20 Aug 2026, 11:48 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
1m 30s
Average length
1m 30s

Measured directly from 1 video 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

60 reactions across 16 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.0% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
🔥3050.0%
2135.0%
35.00%
👌23.33%
👍23.33%
😁23.33%

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 16 of the 34 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 60 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 34 most recent posts we hold, published 17 July 2026 to 20 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.

Advertising

Ad load
5.88%
2 of 34 posts carry an ad marker
Regulatory tokens
2
posts carrying an erid · 2 distinct tokens
Median views · ads
85.0
over 2 measured posts
Median views · rest
240
over 32 measured posts

An ad marker, not a judgement about a post. A post is counted here because it carries one of two explicit markings: an erid token, which Russian law has required on paid placements since 2022 and which is issued against a specific advertising contract, or a #реклама / #ad hashtag in the body, which is the channel declaring it itself. The first is documentary; the second is a self-declaration and is weaker. No classifier reads the text and decides — nothing on this site guesses that a post is an advertisement.

This is a floor, and it can only ever be a floor. A channel that runs paid placements without marking them produces no marker for us to count, and an unmarked ad is indistinguishable from an ordinary post on the public surface. The ad load above therefore means “the share of posts that declared themselves”, never “the share of posts that were paid for”. A low figure is not evidence of a channel that runs few ads.

Both figures are medians, and no ratio between them is published. Each is a view reading that actually occurred on a post, picked by percentile_disc rather than averaged, so one viral post cannot move it and no interpolated value is invented between two readings. The sample on one side is under five posts, which is too thin to compare. The two figures are shown side by side with the count behind each, and deliberately not divided into a headline like “ads get x% fewer views” — an arithmetic that is easy to print and, at this sample size, means nothing.

Advertising tokens recorded on this entry
eridPostsFirst seenLast seen
2SDnjc4aaF5120 August 202620 August 2026
2SDnjesHNV1114 August 202614 August 2026

A token repeated across several posts is one advertising contract placed more than once, which is what the identifier is for. The strings are reproduced exactly as they appeared in the post or in its click-through URL and are not validated against any registry — we record the marker a channel published, and whether it resolves to a real contract is a question for the register that issued it.

Measured over the 34 most recent posts we hold, published 17 July 2026 to 20 August 2026. Views are the latest single reading held for each post, and any reading at or above 1,000 is rounded by Telegram to three significant figures.

Recent posts

20 Aug 2026, 06:01 UTC85 views5 reactionsread 20 August 2026
Advertisementerid 2SDnjc4aaF5Photo

Собственное радио для HR? Как вам такое?! Наши партнеры из компании eventradio запустили полноценное радио для HR - vnutricomfm.ru В эфире 24/7 интервью, музыка, рубрики от коллег, тренды и новости отрасли. Кстати! Ребята обещают не только подкасты, но и живые эфирS на актуальные темы, а также информационное сопровождение крупных HR-форумов! Слушай во время обеда, когда нужен фон, по дороге на работу или в записи

31👌1

19 Aug 2026, 06:58 UTC142 views2 reactionsread 20 August 2026
Photo

Она любит холодный поиск 🙏 ИИ-рекрутер Qooqa сама найдет кандидатов, проведет собеседования и назначит встречи в календаре 🔵Разбирает отклики и собеседует каждого 🔵Ищет лучших кандидатов через холодный поиск 🔵Назначает встречи финалистам прямо в календарь рекрутеру 🔵Общается через любой Job board, мессенджер, соц сеть и email Бесплатно внедрить ИИ-рекрутера Qooqa и закрыть вакансию за 2 клика

2

18 Aug 2026, 13:47 UTC185 views1 reactionsread 20 August 2026

3 промпта для HR, которые закрывают самые неудобные задачи. Собрали свежие промпты канала в одном месте. Те, что решают задачи, которые обычно откладывают до последнего. 📌 Промпты: → Подготовиться к разговору об увольнении Структура, формулировки и ответы на реакции сотрудника. Под вашу конкретную ситуацию, а не общий скрипт из интернета → Найти несостыковки в резюме за 2 минуты Красные флаги, дыры в хронологии и

1

17 Aug 2026, 09:46 UTC208 views2 reactionsread 20 August 2026
Photo

🎁 РОЗЫГРЫШ: 3 книги, которые стоит прочитать HR в 2026 Разыгрываем 3 книги среди 3 победителей в нашем канале МАХ 📕 «HeadHunter. Успех неизбежен» — Михаил Жуков Как стартап стал лидером российского онлайн-рекрутинга. Инсайдерский взгляд на управление и рынок труда. 📕 «Создатель ChatGPT. История Сэма Альтмана» — Кич Хэйги Что происходило внутри OpenAI, пока ChatGPT переворачивал мир и почему это важно понимать кажд

👍2

14 Aug 2026, 12:42 UTC228 viewsread 20 August 2026
Poll

Как вам викторина?

  1. Было интересно, спасибо90%
  2. Слишком просто, давайте посложнее10%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:40 UTC215 views1 reactionsread 20 August 2026
Poll

Какой инструмент лучше всего снижает влияние когнитивных искажений при оценке кандидатов?

  1. Интуиция опытного рекрутера с 10+ годами практики5%
  2. Расширенное интервью по компетенциям без структуры8%
  3. Структурированное интервью с одинаковыми вопросами и заранее заданными критериями оценки84%
  4. Тестовое задание без дедлайна3%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

1

14 Aug 2026, 12:39 UTC190 viewsread 20 August 2026
Poll

Рекрутер провёл подряд трёх слабых кандидатов, а четвёртый оказался крепким середнячком. В итоге его оценили как сильного. Какое искажение повлияло на оценку?

  1. Эффект ореола0%
  2. Аффинити байас2%
  3. Подтверждение предвзятости7%
  4. Эффект контраста90%

Shares as published, totalling 99%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:38 UTC179 viewsread 20 August 2026
Poll

Руководитель отказывает сильному кандидату с формулировкой «он не впишется в нашу культуру». Какой риск несёт эта формулировка?

  1. Никакого. Культурный фит это важный критерий найма0%
  2. Кандидат может подать жалобу в трудовую инспекцию21%
  3. «Культурный фит» без чётких критериев — прикрытие для субъективизма и дискриминации74%
  4. Это размытая формулировка, но на качество найма не влияет5%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:37 UTC166 viewsread 20 August 2026
Poll

HR изучает резюме кандидата. Видит знакомый университет. Сам там учился. Дальше читает внимательнее, замечает плюсы, минусы проходят мимо. Как называется это искажение?

  1. Эффект ореола8%
  2. Эффект схожести78%
  3. Аффинити байас10%
  4. Эффект контраста5%

Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:36 UTC172 viewsread 20 August 2026
Poll

Рекрутер провёл интервью с кандидатом. Тот отлично держался в начале разговора — уверенно, структурно, с юмором. Дальше отвечал хуже, но общее впечатление осталось сильным. Какое искажение сработало?

  1. Эффект якоря25%
  2. Эффект недавности28%
  3. Эффект ореола45%
  4. Подтверждение предвзятости3%

Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:34 UTC177 viewsread 20 August 2026

Викторина! Сегодня проверим, насколько вы доверяете данным, и насколько интуиции 🧠 Каждый HR уверен, что оценивает кандидатов объективно, но когнитивные искажения работают именно тогда, когда вы об этом не подозреваете. А прошлая викторина у нас была на тему «HR-сервисы: какой инструмент для какой задачи». Кто не проходил — ссылка на викторину → https://t.me/digit_HR/1897 Поехали 👇

14 Aug 2026, 06:01 UTC191 views1 reactionsread 20 August 2026
Advertisementerid 2SDnjesHNV1Photo

⚡️ Подбор без иллюзий 2026 — онлайн-форум e-staff 20 августа Рынок меняется быстрее привычных подходов к найму. Стоимость подбора растет, профильных специалистов по-прежнему не хватает, появляются новые ограничения, а ИИ уже меняет правила игры. 🗓 20 августа с 11:00 до 15:00 (Мск) приглашаем на бесплатный онлайн-форум «Подбор без иллюзий 2026». Вместе с экспертами обсудим, что происходит с подбором и какие решения

1

Showing the 12 most recent of 34 posts we hold for @digit_HR. 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 6 most recent of 13 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.

14 Aug 2026, 12:42 UTCAnonymous Poll30 voters

Как вам викторина?

  1. Было интересно, спасибо90%
  2. Слишком просто, давайте посложнее10%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:40 UTCAnonymous Quiz38 voters

Какой инструмент лучше всего снижает влияние когнитивных искажений при оценке кандидатов?

  1. Интуиция опытного рекрутера с 10+ годами практики5%
  2. Расширенное интервью по компетенциям без структуры8%
  3. Структурированное интервью с одинаковыми вопросами и заранее заданными критериями оценки84%
  4. Тестовое задание без дедлайна3%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:39 UTCAnonymous Quiz41 voters

Рекрутер провёл подряд трёх слабых кандидатов, а четвёртый оказался крепким середнячком. В итоге его оценили как сильного. Какое искажение повлияло на оценку?

  1. Эффект ореола0%
  2. Аффинити байас2%
  3. Подтверждение предвзятости7%
  4. Эффект контраста90%

Shares as published, totalling 99%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:38 UTCAnonymous Quiz39 voters

Руководитель отказывает сильному кандидату с формулировкой «он не впишется в нашу культуру». Какой риск несёт эта формулировка?

  1. Никакого. Культурный фит это важный критерий найма0%
  2. Кандидат может подать жалобу в трудовую инспекцию21%
  3. «Культурный фит» без чётких критериев — прикрытие для субъективизма и дискриминации74%
  4. Это размытая формулировка, но на качество найма не влияет5%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:37 UTCAnonymous Quiz40 voters

HR изучает резюме кандидата. Видит знакомый университет. Сам там учился. Дальше читает внимательнее, замечает плюсы, минусы проходят мимо. Как называется это искажение?

  1. Эффект ореола8%
  2. Эффект схожести78%
  3. Аффинити байас10%
  4. Эффект контраста5%

Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

14 Aug 2026, 12:36 UTCAnonymous Quiz40 voters

Рекрутер провёл интервью с кандидатом. Тот отлично держался в начале разговора — уверенно, структурно, с юмором. Дальше отвечал хуже, но общее впечатление осталось сильным. Какое искажение сработало?

  1. Эффект якоря25%
  2. Эффект недавности28%
  3. Эффект ореола45%
  4. Подтверждение предвзятости3%

Shares as published, totalling 101%. 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 34 most recent posts we hold, published 17 July 2026 to 20 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.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 608,275 of 1,629,419 entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

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 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.

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.

Эйчаргейт| Перезагрузка
@hrgate · 55,780
Telegram ranks this channel #74 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 28 August 2026
Магия Excel
@lemur_excel · 49,900
Telegram ranks this channel #79 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 25 August 2026

This channel appears in 2 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 1 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Диджитал в HR” (@digit_HR), 7,266 subscribers as measured 1 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/digit_HR.

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.