2 measurements taken within a single day. 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 692–694 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
4 Nov 2026, 03:07
693
no change
3 Nov 2026, 07:22
693
first reading
Engagement
11 posts held, back to 18 October 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
270.3%
avg views ÷ 693 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,870
7 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.51%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
11
of 11 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 2 November 2026
Posts held
11 (18 October 2026 – 2 November 2026)
Views total
13,114
Reactions total
329
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
3 Nov 2026, 07:22 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
329 reactions across 7 posts, in 9 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.2% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
165
50.2%
custom 5296346948356302335
46
14.0%
custom 5190701868250053066
39
11.9%
😁
33
10.0%
🤩
20
6.08%
👻
12
3.65%
🔥
7
2.13%
custom 5850644359447317988
6
1.82%
custom 5395559528957747443
1
0.304%
Custom emoji. 4 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 7 of the 11 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 329 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 11 most recent posts we hold, published 18 October 2026 to 2 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 5 of 11 posts held from the last 30 days (45.5%) 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).
#рандомнаяцитата
Читаешь Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, и внезапно глаз дергается от недавних математических упражнений 🤓
Как отметил профессор Парк в своей Freshfields Lecture в 2002 году, теоретически существует три вида арбитров — а именно: те, кто умеет считать, и те, кто не умеет: см. Парк, "Многогранная природа арбитража: ценность правил и риски дискреционных полномочий" (2003) 19 Arb Intl 2…
Не хватает authorities — напиши их сам: когда даритель может отменить дарение
#downbylaw
Всю мою полу-академическую карьеру меня интересуют "внеправовые" (на первый взгляд) факторы, влияющие на право: связь партийной принадлежности судьи и его правовой позиции, влияние когнитивных искажений на судебные решения, личные конфликты между видными юристами и их воздействие на правовую систему ( да, я про вас, Бэкон и Кук …
[начало см. тут]
На фотографиях Елизавета Коцебу и Софья Фальц-Фейн.
К слову, Фальц-Фейны после Революции, судя по всему, осели в Лихтенштейне и оставили след как минимум в истории велоспорта и бобслея.
[начало см. тут]
По мнению Сената, арендатор, вышедший за договорные пределы пользования вещью, уже не может ссылаться на предоставленное ему договором право пользоваться чужим имуществом и не является законным владельцем для целей иска об истребовании доходов. Поэтому извлеченные таким образом доходы должны быть переданы арендодателю:
"За пользование имением, которое противно договору и тому назначению, для которо…
Истребование доходов за пользование поместьем в нарушение условий аренды
#дореволюционное
Последние семь лет я, среди прочего, пытался ответить на вопрос: когда лицо, чье право нарушено, может взыскать с нарушителя доходы, которые тот получил в результате нарушения (почитать мои измышления об этом можно тут).
Одна из проблем, которая занимала меня все эти годы: должен ли арендатор, нарушивший условие договора о пре…
...Legal rules may have a 😎central core of undisputed meaning😎, and in some cases it may be difficult to imagine a dispute as to the meaning of a rule breaking out. The provision of s. 9 of the Wills Act, 1837, that there must be two witnesses to a will may not seem likely to raise problems of interpretation.
Yet all rules have a 🌕penumbra of uncertainty 🌕 where the judge must choose between alternatives. Even the m…
Showing the 11 most recent of 11 posts we hold for @legal_penumbra. 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 4 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“пенумбра права 🌒” (@legal_penumbra), 693 subscribers as measured 4 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/legal_penumbra.
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.
