Education — 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 53% 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
6 measurements spanning 51 days, net +10. 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 974–987 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
27 Sept 2026, 10:41
985
+3
12 Sept 2026, 02:56
982
+2
4 Sept 2026, 11:18
980
+1
21 Aug 2026, 02:54
979
+4
8 Aug 2026, 00:46
975
no change
7 Aug 2026, 12:51
975
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 12 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 7 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
39s
Average length
39s
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
119 reactions across 12 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.2% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
49
41.2%
🔥
24
20.2%
👍
13
10.9%
🍓
6
5.04%
🙏
5
4.20%
🥰
5
4.20%
custom 5195100606250889609
4
3.36%
custom 5422682311856501431
4
3.36%
👌
3
2.52%
💯
3
2.52%
👏
2
1.68%
👀
1
0.84%
Custom emoji. 2 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 12 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 119 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 12 July 2026 to 7 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.
Знаете, бывает очень тяжело уважать себя, когда снаружи вроде ничего "такого" не происходит. Нет громких побед, нет отношений, нет яркого подтверждения, что Вы на верном пути.
И в такие моменты особенно хочется опереться на что-то понятное: мол, вот когда добьюсь — тогда и буду себя ценить.
Но как раз тут и прячется ловушка.
В психологии это называют переходом от условной самооценки к базовой самоценности. Проще г…
Коллеги, наш блиц-курс по работе с самооценкой завершён🙏.
Три недели мы разбирали, как устроена эта хрупкая конструкция, где она ломается и как её чинить, разбирали кейсы, консультировали настоящего клиента.
Можно было поделиться отзывами участников, но вместо этого мы попросили ответить на один вопрос:
✍️👩🎓«Какой один момент, мысль, фраза или интервенция запомнились вам больше всего?»
И вот ответы:
🐘«Главный инс…
🌟Новое видео на канале - про самооценку и самоценность.
Записала я его спонтанно после сессии с клиенткой, сессия закончилась очень эмоционально.
✍️Важно понимать разницу между самоценностью и самооценкой!
- Как разговаривать с клиентом об этом?(Уж точно не "прими себя" - это все равно что обесценить его переживания)
- как выстраивать те самые внутренние опоры?
- что значит уважать себя и какие вопросы задавать кл…
ВНИМАНИЕ ‼️‼️‼️ #расписание на август в закрытом Клубе!
✅ 5 августа,среда, 10.00 – групповая супервизия. Место супервизанта свободно.
Ведущая Панкова Наталья Николаевна
- Клинический психолог, сексолог, психотерапевт, супервизор, автор обучающих программ для начинающих психологов и сексологов
- Выпускница Ленинградского (СПб) Университета
- Специализация в клинике неврозов, Институте им. Бехтерева.
- 16 лет работал…
На платформе Клуба, который ведет Анна (наверно, уже почти все из вас с ней знакомы😁), было одно бесплатное мероприятие, которое нельзя было пропустить!🔥✍️
Но если вы все-таки пропустили😉, вам доступна запись этого ВОРКШОПА
"МЕТАФОРА В РАБОТЕ С КЛИЕНТАМИ"
Метафора - это не просто украшение речи. Для нас, психологов, - это инструмент. Прямой путь в мир образов клиента и его смыслов, минуя защиты.
Метафора может за…
Коллеги! как ваше лето проходит? расскажите немного)
Я отдыхаю. от всего, и от психологии тоже33%
Я на основной работе, на психологию не хватает ни времени ни сил33%
Я в полной готовности! клиентов меньше не стало! а может, даже больше11%
Собираю урожай) не трогайте меня))33%
Наконец появилось время на учебу, хочется больше практики!11%
The shares total 121%, 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.
Запись разбора готова!
НИЗКАЯ САМООЦЕНКА - В ЭТОМ ЛИ ДЕЛО?
Смотрите в ютуб https://youtu.be/JnAinO-YXg8
Смотрите в вк https://vkvideo.ru/video-204444554_456239229
#разбор_кейса - нажимайте на этот хэштег и смотрите другие разборы!
Ссылка на прямой эфир с разбором кейса -
https://vk.com/call/join/n59N80ED7LX_vFUgKCdyca89b3dx3BwSuzkQxFKKMyg
Заходите прямо по ссылке на 📱-звонок
🕰 в 18ч МСК
Кто готов разобрать свой/клиентский случай - пишите в лс @pankova_psy_sex
или в комментариях
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @psy_sex_pankova. 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.
Коллеги! как ваше лето проходит? расскажите немного)
Я отдыхаю. от всего, и от психологии тоже33%
Я на основной работе, на психологию не хватает ни времени ни сил33%
Я в полной готовности! клиентов меньше не стало! а может, даже больше11%
Собираю урожай) не трогайте меня))33%
Наконец появилось время на учебу, хочется больше практики!11%
The shares total 121%, 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.
Накидать еще примеров - как меняется мишень в зависимости от контекста и того, что стоит за запросом "низкая самооценка"?
Конечно!92%
А можно мой пример (личный/клиентский) разобрать?8%
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is 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 20 most recent posts we hold, published 12 July 2026 to 7 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.
Mentions
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.
Елена Новоселова @novoselova_time · 21,673 Telegram ranks this channel #27 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 22 September 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 27 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Мастерская Клинической Психологии | Наталья Панкова” (@psy_sex_pankova), 985 subscribers as measured 27 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/psy_sex_pankova.
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.
