Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for MIRRONAKE | МИРРОНЕЙК

Channel

MIRRONAKE | МИРРОНЕЙК

@mirronake

6 usernames

On this record: Topic · Observations · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

1,604subscribers

+164 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001635204040
TypeChannel
Usernames@archangel_official @blackpedik @bratishkintwitch @mirronake @truefortnite @twitchbratishkin
CreatedBetween 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live29 August 2026
Measurements held38
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 29 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/mirronake

Topic

Other / unclassifiable — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 88% 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.

Observations

These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.

Views per post sit far above this size band

2,370 average views per post against 1,604 subscribers — an engagement rate of 147.7%. Across the 24,719 registered channels in the same cohort — 1,000–3,162 subscribers, posting mainly in Russian — the middle half sit between 7.47% and 26.4%, with a median of 14.5%.

What this was computed from
Window30 days (31 July 2026 30 August 2026)
Posts measured30 of 31 published in the window (8 exact, 22 rounded by Telegram)
Views totalled71,090
Mature posts only172.0% over 24 posts read at least 24h after publication
Subscribers1,604 measured 29 August 2026
Cohortb1000:rus · 24,719 channels · p10 3.65% · p25 7.47% · p50 14.5% · p75 26.4% · p90 41.5%
Position in cohort99.543th percentile · 10.2× the cohort median
Uncertainty±0.185% of the figure, from Telegram’s rounding
Post languageRussian · 100.0%of the window’s posts

When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.

This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal.A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.

Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 30 August 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.

Growth

1,4401,6051,522.57 August 2026 — 1,440 subscribers7 August 2026 — 1,440 subscribers7 August 2026 — 1,440 subscribers7 August 2026 — 1,443 subscribers10 August 2026 — 1,502 subscribers10 August 2026 — 1,502 subscribers13 August 2026 — 1,564 subscribers13 August 2026 — 1,565 subscribers14 August 2026 — 1,572 subscribers15 August 2026 — 1,578 subscribers15 August 2026 — 1,578 subscribers16 August 2026 — 1,581 subscribers16 August 2026 — 1,581 subscribers16 August 2026 — 1,581 subscribers16 August 2026 — 1,582 subscribers18 August 2026 — 1,584 subscribers18 August 2026 — 1,584 subscribers18 August 2026 — 1,584 subscribers19 August 2026 — 1,584 subscribers19 August 2026 — 1,585 subscribers19 August 2026 — 1,586 subscribers21 August 2026 — 1,588 subscribers22 August 2026 — 1,589 subscribers22 August 2026 — 1,589 subscribers23 August 2026 — 1,590 subscribers23 August 2026 — 1,589 subscribers24 August 2026 — 1,593 subscribers25 August 2026 — 1,594 subscribers25 August 2026 — 1,594 subscribers25 August 2026 — 1,596 subscribers26 August 2026 — 1,600 subscribers26 August 2026 — 1,600 subscribers28 August 2026 — 1,602 subscribers28 August 2026 — 1,602 subscribers28 August 2026 — 1,605 subscribers28 August 2026 — 1,605 subscribers29 August 2026 — 1,605 subscribers29 August 2026 — 1,604 subscribers1,6047 August 202629 August 2026
38 measurements spanning 23 days, net +164. 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 1,415–1,630 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 38
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
29 Aug 2026, 18:371,604-1
29 Aug 2026, 05:431,605no change
28 Aug 2026, 16:361,605no change
28 Aug 2026, 15:241,605+3
28 Aug 2026, 05:041,602no change
28 Aug 2026, 04:341,602+2
26 Aug 2026, 16:521,600no change
26 Aug 2026, 13:231,600+4
25 Aug 2026, 14:191,596+2
25 Aug 2026, 05:541,594no change
25 Aug 2026, 03:331,594+1
24 Aug 2026, 23:221,593+4
23 Aug 2026, 06:591,589-1
23 Aug 2026, 03:131,590+1
22 Aug 2026, 06:351,589no change
22 Aug 2026, 05:551,589+1
21 Aug 2026, 22:271,588+2
19 Aug 2026, 23:331,586+1
19 Aug 2026, 16:331,585+1
19 Aug 2026, 03:061,584first reading

Engagement

35 posts held, back to 29 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 6 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
147.7%
avg views ÷ 1,604 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,370
30 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.42%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
31
of 35 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
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 14 August 2026
Posts held35 (29 July 202614 August 2026)
Views total71,090
Reactions total1,012
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken14 Aug 2026, 19:15 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
5m 14s
Average length
52s

Measured directly from 6 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.

Reaction mix

1,158 reactions across 34 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 38.9% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
custom 530982878627391975745038.9%
29125.1%
💩14812.8%
👍1069.15%
👎816.99%
custom 5312140999097588216423.63%
custom 5309779119272108108403.45%

Custom emoji. 3 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 areTelegram’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 34 of the 35 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 1,158reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 35 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 14 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
7
across the posts below
Posts paid on
7
of 34 we hold a reading for · 21%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @mirronake. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.

Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.

This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.

Counted over the 35 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 July 2026 to 14 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.

Recent posts

14 Aug 2026, 00:31 UTC836 views16 reactionsread 14 August 2026
Photo

сука, воки подписан как voki, а я не подписан как модератор Вовы. это настолько далёкий человек видимо делал и я там записан только потому что с Воки играю блять.

14💩2

14 Aug 2026, 00:29 UTC824 views8 reactionsread 14 August 2026
Photo

Это что за хуета, хули я тут делаю, так еще и с доксершой педофилкой Не втубер и не в команде 89squad, но в сети сквада: стримит вместе с Воки и играет в общих коллабах, у avelisek в названии эфира стоит его тег. Зрители 11 августа записали их с mokimioki в «новую пару твича» — это шутка чата, а не наш замер.

👎6💩2

13 Aug 2026, 19:57 UTC874 views30 reactionsread 14 August 2026
Forwarded from @udo1nnPhoto

дурронейк школьник

custom 5309828786273919757236💩1

13 Aug 2026, 19:57 UTC856 views29 reactionsread 14 August 2026
Forwarded from @udo1nnVideo

мирронак ханав эндичан, я хз почему именно такой стак 🥴

custom 5309828786273919757244💩1

13 Aug 2026, 19:56 UTC852 views28 reactionsread 14 August 2026
Forwarded from @udo1nnPhoto

резкий мирронак не жирн оп💀 а почему ему будто лет 12 блин

custom 5309828786273919757243💩1

13 Aug 2026, 13:09 UTC975 views38 reactions1 Starread 14 August 2026
Video

с нихуя тип признался https://eblo.id/mNNdojw

custom 5309828786273919757343💩1

11 Aug 2026, 17:30 UTC≈1,020 views35 reactions1 Starread 14 August 2026
Forwarded from @BotovodXVideo

Ханова нагрели на 3 тысячи баксов. К вам приходит какая-то компания которая говорит вам надо прорекламировать клавиатуры и мышки. Пятёрка рассказывает о том, как Ханова наебали на 3 тысячи долларов

custom 5309828786273919757322💩1

10 Aug 2026, 23:05 UTC≈2,090 views46 reactions1 Starread 14 August 2026

жду трёх спортиков у двери 😅

custom 530982878627391975743💩21

10 Aug 2026, 12:51 UTC≈2,150 views43 reactions1 Starread 14 August 2026
Photo

бля у стима партнёра взломали и там данные слили сука

💩35custom 53098287862739197578

9 Aug 2026, 21:16 UTC≈2,010 views81 reactions1 Starread 14 August 2026
Photo

прайм окончен

👎73👍6💩2

Showing the 12 most recent of 35 posts we hold for @mirronake. 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.

Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 1,141,831 of 1,626,935entries 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

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.

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 29 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“MIRRONAKE | МИРРОНЕЙК” (@mirronake), 1,604 subscribers as measured 29 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/mirronake.

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.