Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Сильно сказано | Наташа Широкова

Channel

Сильно сказано | Наташа Широкова

@natashirr

On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

8,975subscribers

-42 since we began measuring on 5 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001684850421
TypeChannel
Username@natashirr
CreatedBetween 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live18 September 2026
Measurements held15
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 18 September 2026
On Telegramt.me/natashirr

Topic

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 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 45% 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

8,9589,0178,987.55 August 2026 — 9,017 subscribers6 August 2026 — 9,017 subscribers6 August 2026 — 9,014 subscribers9 August 2026 — 9,009 subscribers12 August 2026 — 8,997 subscribers16 August 2026 — 8,993 subscribers19 August 2026 — 8,998 subscribers22 August 2026 — 8,994 subscribers25 August 2026 — 8,984 subscribers28 August 2026 — 8,973 subscribers31 August 2026 — 8,970 subscribers4 September 2026 — 8,958 subscribers9 September 2026 — 8,961 subscribers13 September 2026 — 8,958 subscribers18 September 2026 — 8,975 subscribers8,9755 August 202618 September 2026
15 measurements spanning 43 days, net -42. 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 8,949–9,026 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
18 Sept 2026, 01:388,975+17
13 Sept 2026, 14:178,958-3
9 Sept 2026, 14:418,961+3
4 Sept 2026, 15:188,958-12
31 Aug 2026, 20:448,970-3
28 Aug 2026, 12:048,973-11
25 Aug 2026, 19:048,984-10
22 Aug 2026, 10:088,994-4
19 Aug 2026, 03:068,998+5
16 Aug 2026, 02:538,993-4
12 Aug 2026, 15:338,997-12
9 Aug 2026, 06:419,009-5
6 Aug 2026, 15:149,014-3
6 Aug 2026, 02:529,017no change
5 Aug 2026, 22:029,017first reading

Engagement

50 posts held, back to 20 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 31 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
11.0%
avg views ÷ 8,975 subscribers
Avg views / post
983
13 posts measured
Reaction rate
4.00%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
13
of 50 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. It is computed over the 11 of 13 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 27 August 2026
Posts held50 (20 July 202627 August 2026)
Views total12,783
Reactions total440
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken28 Aug 2026, 15:49 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
21m 32s
Average length
1m 21s

Measured directly from 16 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

1,840 reactions across 41 posts, in 24 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 48.0% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
88448.0%
🔥38020.7%
👍21111.5%
😁904.89%
👏583.15%
💔563.04%
💯281.52%
❤‍🔥231.25%
🥰231.25%
🙏191.03%
🤩140.761%
🕊100.543%
🤔100.543%
🤯70.38%
😢60.326%
👀50.272%
🍓40.217%
🤡40.217%
🤣30.163%
10.054%
4 further kinds40.217%

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 43 of the 50 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 1,866 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 50 most recent posts we hold, published 20 July 2026 to 27 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
2
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 50 we hold a reading for · 2%
Most on one post
2
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @natashirr. 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 50 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 20 July 2026 to 27 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

27 Aug 2026, 09:11 UTC789 views45 reactionsread 28 August 2026

Ксения заманивает Аллу Борисовну в двойную ловушку: ➡️Ловушка оценочных суждений: сильный, слабый, тяжело — это все субъективные оценки ➡️Ловушка лести: вы сильная, а вокруг вас слабаки. Из-за этой лести велик соблазн принять те оценки, которые предлагает Ксения, и сказать: да, вот я такая сильная, как же мне тяжело. Но Аллу Борисовну так просто не возьмешь. Она меняет оценки Ксении собственными: интересные мужчины

🔥31👍11🤩2😁1

27 Aug 2026, 09:11 UTC754 views37 reactionsread 28 August 2026

Сильная женщина в стране слабых мужчин

15😁12🔥6❤‍🔥2👍2

26 Aug 2026, 11:03 UTC915 views7 reactionsread 28 August 2026
Poll

Чей ответ круче?

  1. Любовь ❤️15%
  2. Павел 🔥28%
  3. Оба ✅58%

Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

7

26 Aug 2026, 11:03 UTC873 views33 reactionsread 28 August 2026
Video

Если вас оценивают — необязательно переубеждать собеседника, можно просто подчеркнуть субъективность его оценки. Тут два фрагмента, где интервьюер критикует работу актера. В обоих случаях актеры подчеркивают субъективность оценки, но Любовь делает это мягко, а Павел — резко. Выбирайте в зависимости от контекста, собеседника и своего настроения 😎 🎬 Фрагменты интервью Ксении Собчак с Любовью Аксеновой и Юрия Дудя (и

😁19👍9🤣3🔥2

25 Aug 2026, 15:48 UTC922 views42 reactionsread 28 August 2026

Благодарю за ваши развернутые и мудрые ответы, Наталья. Всегда очень интересно и ценно, без оценок и усложнений, даже когда вопросы выходят далеко за рамки коммуникаций. Это уже фактически глубокие психологические разборы. Добавлю фильм по теме, может кому-то будет полезен - Огнеупорный.

35💯4🕊3

25 Aug 2026, 11:04 UTC907 views66 reactionsread 28 August 2026
Voice message

Мой комментарий в рубрику #чтоответим. Кратко: заботьтесь о себе ❤️. И разделяйте ответственность

37🔥12💯10👍7

24 Aug 2026, 09:48 UTC≈1,050 views69 reactionsread 28 August 2026

Наталья, здравствуйте. Ситуация немного похожа на мою толькл наоборот. Хочу разобрать. Муж упрекает меня как раз в такой не вовлеченности, но это не правда. Вот ситуация: Он с прошлого года хочет поехать на море с ночёвкой и палаткой, это вообще не моя история, но я всегда стараюсь подстроиться. Думаю, ему это нравится, я тоже могу попробовать, но так случилось, что у меня обнаружили кисту (из-за неё болит живот и пл

💔5412😢2🥴1

24 Aug 2026, 09:48 UTC902 viewsread 28 August 2026

#чтоответим (точнее, что посоветуем), когда сложно друг друга услышать? ⤵️

22 Aug 2026, 11:11 UTC≈1,180 views71 reactionsread 28 August 2026

Забирайте в копилочку еще один способ элегантно переадресовать вопрос или упрек собеседнику. — Ты что, хочешь сказать, что не изменяешь своему мужу? Все изменяют. — А вот эти измены — это знакомая тебе модель поведения? — Ну ты явно дружишь только с теми, у кого есть деньги — Я правильно понимаю, что это знакомая тебе модель поведения? Олесин ироничный ответ на очевидный намек тоже можно взять на заметку 😎 👀 Фраг

👍3723🔥8💯3

22 Aug 2026, 11:11 UTC≈1,130 views39 reactionsread 28 August 2026
Video

Показаться глупее, чем ты есть

😁26🔥7🤩4💯1🕊1

21 Aug 2026, 09:46 UTC≈1,210 views8 reactionsread 28 August 2026
Poll

Как думаете, что это в данном случае?

  1. Агрессия22%
  2. Забота19%
  3. Заботливая агрессия55%
  4. Случайность8%

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.

8

Showing the 12 most recent of 50 posts we hold for @natashirr. 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.

Polls

The 2 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.

26 Aug 2026, 11:03 UTCAnonymous Poll202 voters

Чей ответ круче?

  1. Любовь ❤️15%
  2. Павел 🔥28%
  3. Оба ✅58%

Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

21 Aug 2026, 09:46 UTCAnonymous Poll201 voters

Как думаете, что это в данном случае?

  1. Агрессия22%
  2. Забота19%
  3. Заботливая агрессия55%
  4. Случайность8%

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.

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 50 most recent posts we hold, published 20 July 2026 to 27 August 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.

Forward network

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.

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.

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.

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.

АЛЕКСАНДРА ФРАНЦ про ХИМИЮ
@chemistry_frants · 45,307
Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 80 here — alongside 79 others — read 27 August 2026
Михаил Дементьев. Кинетический интеллект
@kintellect · 36,355
Telegram ranks this channel #37 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 1 September 2026

This channel appears in 2 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists 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 18 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Сильно сказано | Наташа Широкова” (@natashirr), 8,975 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/natashirr.

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.