Channel
@havin_hosseiny
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Posts recorded as deleted · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
50,331subscribers
-2,922 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 31,623–100,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001214929862 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @havin_hosseiny |
| Created | Between 1 April 2018 and 31 August 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 7 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 62 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 7 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/havin_hosseiny |
Education — 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 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 81% 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Nov 2026, 21:59 | 50,331 | +33 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 20:56 | 50,298 | -98 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 20:01 | 50,396 | -15 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 23:27 | 50,411 | -24 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 20:57 | 50,435 | -26 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 20:27 | 50,461 | -44 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 20:48 | 50,505 | -17 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 18:08 | 50,522 | -30 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 19:39 | 50,552 | -30 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 20:10 | 50,582 | -25 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 20:45 | 50,607 | -50 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 18:29 | 50,657 | -16 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 18:20 | 50,673 | -27 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 18:28 | 50,700 | -27 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 20:18 | 50,727 | -35 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 18:37 | 50,762 | -27 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 21:49 | 50,789 | -34 |
| 21 Oct 2026, 16:50 | 50,823 | -41 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 12:15 | 50,864 | -30 |
| 19 Oct 2026, 13:09 | 50,894 | first reading |
264 posts held, back to 1 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 188 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. It is computed over the 88 of 90 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 264 (1 July 2026 – 7 November 2026) |
| Views total | 171,021 |
| Reactions total | 1,531 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Nov 2026, 13:26 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.
Measured directly from 15 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.
5,931 reactions across 253 posts, in 11 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 73.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 4,378 | 73.8% | |
| 👍 | 607 | 10.2% | |
| 😢 | 371 | 6.26% | |
| 😍 | 264 | 4.45% | |
| 🔥 | 117 | 1.97% | |
| 😎 | 49 | 0.826% | |
| 🎉 | 43 | 0.725% | |
| 👏 | 40 | 0.674% | |
| 🦄 | 36 | 0.607% | |
| 🕊 | 19 | 0.32% | |
| ⚡ | 7 | 0.118% |
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 255 of the 264 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 5,931 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 264 most recent posts we hold, published 1 July 2026 to 7 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: 1 of 90 posts held from the last 30 days (1.11%) 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).
حالا چطوری نذاریم احساسات بهجامون تصمیم بگیرن؟ 👀 یه قانون ساده رو امتحان کن: قبل از هر سرمایهگذاری، برای خودت مشخص کن: ☑ چرا میخوام این دارایی رو بخرم؟ ☑ اگه قیمتش افت کرد، تا چه اندازه توان تحمل ضرر دارم؟ ☑ چه اتفاقی باعث میشه تصمیمم رو دوباره بررسی کنم؟ اینجوری قبل از اینکه ترس یا هیجان سراغت بیاد، برای تصمیمگیریت یه چارچوب داری. سرمایهگذار خوب کسی نیست که هیچوقت نمیترسه؛ کسیه که نمیذاره ترس بهتنه…
❤6
جالبه بدونین توی روانشناسی اقتصادی یه مفهومی داریم به اسم «زیانگریزی» یا Loss Aversion! 🧠 تحقیقات نشون داده آدما در خیلی از موقعیتها، ضرر مالی رو شدیدتر از سود هماندازهش احساس میکنن! حالا این چه ربطی به زندگی ما داره؟! مثلاً فرض کن یه مقدار طلا خریدی و قیمتش شروع میکنه به پایین اومدن… ممکنه فقط از ترس اینکه بیشتر ضرر نکنی، عجولانه بفروشیش! یا برعکس، یه سرمایهگذاری اشتباه رو مدتها نگه داری، فقط چون دلت ن…
❤17
دخترها یه سؤال عجیب! 👀 فکر کن امروز ۵ میلیون تومن به دست بیاری… حالا تصور کن ۵ میلیون تومن از دست بدی! به نظرت خوشحالی اون ۵ میلیون سود بیشتره یا ناراحتی اون ۵ میلیون ضرر؟! 🤔
❤18😢8👍3🦄1
بعد از دیدن خرجهات، چیزی بود که خودتم ازش تعجب کنی؟! 😂
The shares total 104%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
یه نکته مهم از این تمرین: مدیریت پول از کمتر خرج کردن شروع نمیشه، از آگاهانه خرج کردن شروع میشه! ❤️ قرار نیست همه تفریحات و خریدهای موردعلاقهت رو حذف کنی. قراره یاد بگیری چطور هم از امروزت لذت ببری، هم برای فردات برنامه داشته باشی. حالا بهمون بگو:👇
❤13👍5
حالا خرجهای ماه قبلت رو یه نگاه بنداز و این سه تا سؤال رو از خودت بپرس: ۱. کدوم خرید واقعاً لازم بود و از انجامش راضیم؟ ۲. کدوم خرید رو بیشتر از روی هیجان یا تحت تأثیر بقیه انجام دادم؟ ۳. اگه برگردم به اول ماه، کدوم سه تا خرج رو متفاوت انجام میدم؟ لازم نیست خودتو بابت هیچ خریدی سرزنش کنی! هدف اینه که بفهمی پولت بیشتر صرف چه چیزایی میشه و چقدر از خرجهات واقعاً با خواستهها و هدفهات هماهنگه.
❤14👍8
دخترها، امشب یه چالش کوچولو داریم! 💸 یه تمرین ۳ دقیقهای که ممکنه باعث بشه نگاهت به خرجهای ماهانهت تغییر کنه! فقط گوشیت رو بردار و برو سراغ پیامکهای بانکی یا تاریخچه تراکنشهات. آمادهای؟ 👀
👍12❤6
راستی دخترها، آقای علیزاده رو یادتونه؟! 😍 همون استادی که قبلاً توی دورههای هاوین درباره سواد مالی بهمون آموزش میدادن. قراره دوباره کنارمون باشن و این بار درباره یه سری مهارت خیلی کاربردی صحبت کنن! از اون چیزایی که به نظرم هر دختری بهتره بلد باشه. ❤️ فردا یه خبر خوب براتون داریم! 👀
❤45👍14
فکر کن دو نفر درآمد تقریباً یکسانی دارن. یکی آخر هر ماه میگه: «من که هیچی نخریدم، پس پولام کجا رفت؟!» 😭 اون یکی برای خرجهاش برنامه داره، یه مقدار برای روز مبادا کنار میذاره و کمکم اصول سرمایهگذاری رو یاد میگیره. تفاوتشون لزوماً توی میزان درآمد نیست؛ توی تصمیمهاییه که با پولشون میگیرن. حالا یه سؤال… ما از بچگی کلی درس خوندیم، ولی چند نفرمون واقعاً یاد گرفتیم چطور پولمون رو مدیریت کنیم و تصمیمهای مالی بهت…
❤26👍7😎2
یه چیزی هست که تقریباً همهمون دلمون میخواد… اینکه یه روزی بتونیم بدون نگرانی از آینده، برای زندگیمون تصمیم بگیریم! 🥹 ولی واقعیت اینه که فقط پول درآوردن، خیال آدم رو راحت نمیکنه. باید بلد باشیم با پولمون چیکار کنیم!
❤34
راستی، قصه دیروزش با «داف درگیر قسط» رو دیدین؟! 💅🏻😂 انگار بعضی از ما بهجای هزار و یک شب، هر روز هزار و یک تا مسئولیت داریم! ولی شهرزاد یه ویژگی مهم داره… بهجای فرار از مشکلات، دنبال راهحل میگرده! ❤️ اگه شما هم از دیدن قصههای شهرزاد خوشحالین، یه قلب بذارین.
❤55😍4
شهرزادِ ما قراره با دغدغههای واقعی خودمون سروکله بزنه! از کار و درس و رابطه گرفته تا پول و هزار تا مسئولیت دیگه… همون چیزایی که شاید هر روز باهاشون درگیریم، ولی کمتر دربارهشون حرف میزنیم.
❤31
Showing the 12 most recent of 264 posts we hold for @havin_hosseiny. 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.
We recorded 1 post on @havin_hosseiny as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
The 6 most recent of 15 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.
بعد از دیدن خرجهات، چیزی بود که خودتم ازش تعجب کنی؟! 😂
The shares total 104%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
دیروز تونستی کامل توی وبینار باشی؟
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
همین الان چقدر سرمایه داری؟
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
به عنوان یه دختر بزرگ ترین دغدغه امروزت چیه؟
The shares total 156%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
شما هم احساس میکنید پیدا کردن یک دوست خوب خیلی سخت شده؟
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
شما چکاپ سالانه انجام میدید؟
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not 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 264 most recent posts we hold, published 1 July 2026 to 7 November 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.
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.
Named by 6 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.
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 24 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
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.
This channel appears in 6 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 7 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“هاوین | مدرسه توسعه دختران” (@havin_hosseiny), 50,331 subscribers as measured 7 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/havin_hosseiny.
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.