https://youtu.be/hqryz0cmj08
👍10

Channel
@makahond
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
1,085subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001125085832 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @makahond |
| Created | Between 1 June 2017 and 30 September 2020 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 18 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 14 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 18 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/makahond |
Other / unclassifiable — 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 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 18 Sept 2026, 12:21 | 1,085 | +1 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 05:41 | 1,084 | -1 |
| 10 Sept 2026, 03:17 | 1,085 | -3 |
| 5 Sept 2026, 04:40 | 1,088 | +2 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 10:57 | 1,086 | -2 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 08:33 | 1,088 | +2 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 23:27 | 1,086 | +3 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 07:32 | 1,083 | -5 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 18:15 | 1,088 | +2 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 13:35 | 1,086 | -2 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 16:01 | 1,088 | +1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 22:13 | 1,087 | +2 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 05:31 | 1,085 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 05:25 | 1,085 | first reading |
19 posts held, back to 20 June 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 19 posts for this entry, the most recent from 2 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
457 reactions across 19 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 38.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 175 | 38.3% | |
| 🫡 | 104 | 22.8% | |
| ❤ | 98 | 21.4% | |
| 😁 | 63 | 13.8% | |
| 🔥 | 12 | 2.63% | |
| 😢 | 3 | 0.656% | |
| 🤔 | 2 | 0.438% |
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 19 of the 19 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 457 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 20 June 2026 to 2 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.
https://youtu.be/hqryz0cmj08
👍10
Тю! А шо такое? 4 года ж нормально было всё?
👍18😁15
https://youtu.be/8KGxHzkYA5U
👍12
Як же бісять люди які не витримують дистанцію і втикають...
👍20😁6❤1🤔1
Потери техники за 2 недели по данным Орикс. Россия потеряла 110 единиц, Украина 98. Соотношение 1,1 к 1. Похоже тут пока не отображены потери в результате российской атаке при участии 10 танков один из которых был оснащен активной защитой Арена-М.
🫡12❤4👍3
Думаю всі хто більш менш слідкує розуміє до чого ми рухались на фронті. Реально в плануванні операцій Сирський топ.
👍8🫡3❤1
Дякую за службу, генерале Сирський. Роздумуючи над персоною О. С., я досі не доходжу до однозначних висновків. Не будучи знайомим особисто, важко розділити, що в успіхах й невдачах було пов'язано з його особистими якостями, а що з якостями виконавців та його керівництва. Армійська система комплексна, й внесок однієї особистості (навіть на найвищій посаді) розмивається серед багатьох. Обставини сильніші ніж людина. В…
🫡9❤4👍2🤔1
Сегодня только сводка. Словил ячмень на глаз, как понимаете не ок с таким в эфир) https://youtu.be/4KnqorNJ5GU
🫡13👍6😢3
https://youtu.be/IvXKGjXLY2I
👍10
Cделал видео на двух языках, заняло много времени, так что не факт, что сегодня будет ДЭ, ну и по результатам просмотров посмотрю буду ли дальше их делать. В общем старая добрая "Ситуация на фронтах" https://youtu.be/_H_TAv50kd4?si=kPhMtTUS3kWdL0Vk
❤18👍5
Потери техники за 1 месяц по данным Орикс. Россия потеряла 250 единиц, Украина 286. Соотношение 1 к 1,1. Потери техники за последний месяц выросли но в основном за счет артиллерийский систем у обеих сторон. Хотя 27 танков у россиян это тоже не так чтобы мало для данного этапа войны.
🫡11❤4
Люди гинуть під обстрілами в ліжках, тому що їм часто банально немає куди йти. Хоча навіть звичайний підвал будинку значно підвищує шанси на виживання, проте в Києві підвали часто в такому стані, що краще туди і не заходити. Що я б зробив за ці 4+ роки війни для захисту мешканців Києва, керуючі його ресурсами? 1. Провів би аудит всіх існуючих сховищ, укриттів і підвалів, щоб розуміти повну картину, та визначив би най…
👍59❤4
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @makahond. 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.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
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 18 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Makahon” (@makahond), 1,085 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/makahond.
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.