Art & design — 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 19 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 61% 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
8 measurements spanning 40 days, net +40. 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 904–956 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
17 Sept 2026, 00:21
950
+3
8 Sept 2026, 12:36
947
+16
30 Aug 2026, 00:11
931
+1
22 Aug 2026, 09:48
930
+14
14 Aug 2026, 11:38
916
+5
8 Aug 2026, 02:07
911
+1
8 Aug 2026, 01:02
910
no change
7 Aug 2026, 19:51
910
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 19 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 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 4 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
33s
Average length
33s
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
311 reactions across 18 posts, in 18 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 29.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
91
29.3%
👍
66
21.2%
🤣
50
16.1%
🥰
26
8.36%
😭
24
7.72%
😐
21
6.75%
🤡
12
3.86%
🤔
5
1.61%
🔥
4
1.29%
🥴
3
0.965%
💔
2
0.643%
🍌
1
0.322%
🍓
1
0.322%
💋
1
0.322%
😁
1
0.322%
🤪
1
0.322%
🤬
1
0.322%
🤯
1
0.322%
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 18 of the 20 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 311 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 19 July 2026 to 4 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.
حالا دارم فکر میکنم اگه یه انسان با توجه به احساسات و زندگی خودش به هوش مصنوعی دستورات خاصی داده باشه تا هنر خاصی که مد نظرش هست رو با اون هوش مصنوعی خلق کنه اونوقت تکلیف چیه. به نظرم این تا حدی قابل پذیرشه. هرچند باز هم زیاد جالب نیست. اگه قرار بود هر شخصی از راه میرسه با هوش مصنوعی یه هنری خلق کنه اونوقت این همه آدمی که عمرشون رو صرف استعداد و تمریناتشون کردن چی؟ اصلا تو کونم نمیره. نمیدونم جدی. این قضیه هم مثل ای…
نمیدونم احمقانهست یا نه ولی من واقعا با هر نوع هنری که ساختهی AI باشه مشکل دارم. حتی سادهترین عکسها. ازشون میترسم و همزمان کوچکترین ارزش و زیبایی هم برام ندارن. به عنوان یک آدمیزاد، عاشق داستانم یا بهتر بگم عاشق داستانیام که پشت هنر وجود داره. عاشق احساسات خوب و بدی هستم که هنرمند حین خلق کردن اثرش داشته. فکر میکنم هم همینه که هنر رو ارزشمند میکنه. وقتی از آهنگی خوشم میاد یا نقاشی زیبایی میبینم دوست دارم بدونم …
به صورت کلی باید گفت سلبریتیها (و حتی برخی اینفلوئنسرها) حکم دلقک رو دارن. یعنی کل وظیفهشون اینه که مردم رو سرگرم کنن. حالا هر نظر و عملی که خارج از این حوزه انجام بدن اصلا اعتبار خاصی نداره؛ یعنی باید مستقیم حواله بدید به کیرتون. ولی متاسفانه چه میشه کرد که سلبریتیایشوز دارید و فکر میکنید هر کسی که با هزار روش شرافتمندانه و ناشرفتمندانه به معروفیتی رسیده باشه لزوما باید آدم خوبی هم باشه یا نظرات و عقاید درستی دا…
بعضی وقتا به این فکر میکنم که کاراکتر گراز توی کارتون تیمون و پومبا رو اومدن جدی جدی با لهجهی ترکی دوبله کردن و اتفاقا انقدر هم بهش میومد که برخلاف بقیه مواقع، ترکهای عزیز حتی اعتراض هم نکردن. اصلا حتی این قضیه که چنین چیزی به ذهن دوبلورها رسیده هم خندهداره::)))))))
شاید باورتون نشه اما چند روزه که تو توییتر در مورد اینکه مردم لباس زیرشون رو میندازن تو لباسشویی یا با دست میشورن دعواست. یعنی گاهی به خودت میگی دیگه هیچی نمیتونه شگفتزدهم کنه و بعد توییتر فارسی رو باز میکنی
این هم دیگه عجیبترین چیزی بود که امروز دیدم. واقعا این چه کسشریه دیگه؟ تو که داری به انگشتت زحمت میدی و «خیلیه» رو تایپ میکنی خب قیمتش رو بگو. وا. یعنی چی اصلا؟ نمیدونم جامعهی آنلاینشاپهای ایرانی داره به کدوم سمت میره ولی هرجا که میره جای خوبی نیست.
👍13
Signed Sogand
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @httpmosadee. 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.
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.
ژاژ | zhazh @zhazhva · 41,110 Telegram ranks this channel #39 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 29 August 2026
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list 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 17 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“مصدع اوقات” (@httpmosadee), 950 subscribers as measured 17 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/httpmosadee.
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.
