Channel
@revolutionbigpost
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
575subscribers
+56 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002455321245 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @revolutionbigpost |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 8 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 15 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/revolutionbigpost |
Politics & activism — 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 21 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Sept 2026, 09:55 | 575 | +5 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 15:56 | 570 | +12 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 17:27 | 558 | +10 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 17:56 | 548 | +15 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 19:25 | 533 | +15 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 14:23 | 518 | -1 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 04:03 | 519 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 19:40 | 519 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 28 April 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 4 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
291 reactions across 17 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 30.6% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 89 | 30.6% | |
| 🤡 | 59 | 20.3% | |
| 💩 | 46 | 15.8% | |
| 👎 | 39 | 13.4% | |
| 🤣 | 15 | 5.15% | |
| 😁 | 12 | 4.12% | |
| 🖕 | 10 | 3.44% | |
| 🌭 | 4 | 1.37% | |
| 👏 | 4 | 1.37% | |
| ✍ | 3 | 1.03% | |
| ❤ | 3 | 1.03% | |
| 🤨 | 2 | 0.687% | |
| ☃ | 1 | 0.344% | |
| 💯 | 1 | 0.344% | |
| 😱 | 1 | 0.344% | |
| 🤮 | 1 | 0.344% | |
| 🥱 | 1 | 0.344% |
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 18 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 291 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 28 April 2026 to 4 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.
#工人工作 本栏目发布工人群众工作讨论，收集反馈 物流行业的阶级斗争 群体： #物流行业工人 关键词: #员工画像 #斗争性 #阶级意识 以下皆以物流行业为例。 1. 普通员工。 这些员工中的男性员工，特别是 三十多到四十多岁 的男性员工，又特别是从事装卸岗等 重体力劳动 的那一部分，斗争性最强。他们中敢于直接向基层管理吼骂甚至挥拳，或者敢于直接撂挑子不干的比例，显著的高于其他岗位，并且特别的显著高于女性工作岗位和年轻人工作岗位（二十岁左右）。 那么，我就给装卸岗这部分人做一个画像。 a.总的来说， 年龄较大的但不是特别大的，比年轻的更有斗争性 ，更“不服管”，更“吃软不吃硬”，更“需要讲理，你不占理就说服不了他们，就很难指挥他们”，更不怕管理人员的狐假虎威，更敢于在认为不满意的时候吼人。 b.大多家庭经济压力大。 这类岗位工资显著高于本厂其他岗位（可以高到百分之四十到五…
👍8👎1🤣1
革命大字报墙 pinned «#工人工作 某罢工事件调查报告 x市的某一个小规模电子配件厂发生了因拖欠工人工资而应发的集体罢工事件。事件的起因是：工厂本来规定承诺的是工人薪资还在每个月15号之前全部付清，但是自从×月份开始，工厂的就推说资金链紧张暂时周转不开，并且口头承诺最多只晚一个月一定把工资结清，可是一个月后工厂依然迟迟没有动静。有几个工人代表前去找领导层询问，结果遭到了辱骂和羞辱，原话是： >“工厂的情况也跟你们讲了，你们tm是听不懂人话吗，工厂能少的了你们这几个钱！能干就干！不能干就滚蛋，天天问问问真鸡巴烦。” 工人又…»
#工人工作 某罢工事件调查报告 x市的某一个小规模电子配件厂发生了因拖欠工人工资而应发的集体罢工事件。事件的起因是：工厂本来规定承诺的是工人薪资还在每个月15号之前全部付清，但是自从×月份开始，工厂的就推说资金链紧张暂时周转不开，并且口头承诺最多只晚一个月一定把工资结清，可是一个月后工厂依然迟迟没有动静。有几个工人代表前去找领导层询问，结果遭到了辱骂和羞辱，原话是： >“工厂的情况也跟你们讲了，你们tm是听不懂人话吗，工厂能少的了你们这几个钱！能干就干！不能干就滚蛋，天天问问问真鸡巴烦。” 工人又去找了劳动监察大队，结果对面直接踢皮球，要求打市长政务热线或者是直接找警察，毫不在乎工人的死活，在其位不谋其政，一群蛀虫。据了解这些工人有些年龄大一点的家里都等着用钱，子女上学，老人看病都需要，可是在紧要关头这些工厂却如同吃人不吐骨的恶魔，剥削压榨着这些工人，而且这个工厂还有很多不合理乱罚钱的恶劣行为，以及对工人辱骂有的年轻一点的…
👍15🤡14💯1😱1
昨天，反革命分子林苏窃取了云水怒频道的管理员权限，并在频道内发文侮辱导师和同志。此前，有人将林苏的身份信息交给了我，而我在错误思想支配下，将其在大字报墙上公布。关于开盒林苏的行为，我必须作自我批评。 首先，这种斗争方式是错误的。从当前情况看，开盒林苏不仅没有推进斗争，反而对我们自身、对革命事业造成了不利影响。这种方式没有获得广大革命同志的认同，客观上把本应争取、团结和教育的同志推远了，也给反动派、机会主义者和政治报派敌对分子提供了攻击我们的口实。他们完全可以借此到真正的群众面前破坏我们的形象，把我们描绘成不讲原则、不讲纪律、依赖阴暗手段的团体。这种后果我必须严肃作自我批评。 我们必须明白，即使某些人是堕落分子、流氓分子，也不等于他们是比主要敌人更加险恶、更加反动的对象。用开盒这种方式对待他们，客观上会给人一种错误信号，仿佛我们把他们看得比真正的中修反动资产阶级专政还要危险。这在政治判断上是混乱的，在斗争策略上是有害的。 我…
👍13💩10🤡5👎3😁3
工革报的论战效率 已经几个月了，我们仍未收到这篇文章
😁8🤡3☃1
Photo, posted without a caption
👏3🤡2🥱1
而工革报那边收到大纲却如获至宝发布在频道上，还真是不比不知道。应该是他们一起炮制的，除三民主义外还要特意强调反对融工路线。
👎11👍8🤡4👏1
我们线下一位同志去会面了，确认了是不可救药的反动分子，于是就终止了合作，就是这样。九那条记录说的就是这回事。证据工革报自己就帮我们发在频道上了，还要什么证据呢？ 工革报的长江之辉却和九线下会面后建立了"兄弟义气"，把反动统战大纲发在工革报频道上。谁支持九的路线，谁反对九的路线还不明白吗？
🤡10👍6❤1
之前一直是讨论他们在某改良企业中融工的问题，试图在里面建立地下工会，以及利用产生的材料在高校中有组织地进行宣传揭露。 约定了五一节期间会面讨论。结果会面前几天他们突然发给我们这个统战大纲，我们研究后认为有重大原则性问题，不过鉴于九说可以根据我们意见修订，我们就没有取消会面，但是会面目标改为进一步了解他们的方案确定是否还有挽救的可能。会面后确信他不可救药并且和工革报一起搞阴谋诡计。于是就进行了切割。
🤡8👍6🤨1
第一，既然对九的定性是政治骗子，请问如何保证他所说的话的真实性，是否包含弯曲造谣的成分?倘若不能确定，有何来工解和九合作的铁证如山? 第二，工革报对九的态度到底是什么，既然已经和九切割并标记为不可信，为什么又将九的言论再搬上来，工革报对九发言的真实性是否有担保，又或者仅凭东夏和九线下见过面又如何得出工解和九密切合作这一结论?更何况九自述中否定了是工解派来的东夏，那么工革报又哪来的证据去指控工解? 第三，截取一小段聊天记录也作为证据搬上来了，怎么这个时候不说断章取义了?那么你们把九的毒草文章不加审核搬运过来事后又态度模糊暧昧，自我批评含糊不清，进而又匆匆忙忙把锅甩给工解，这不是推卸责任是什么?工革报自诩革命组织，这是一个革命组织该有的素质吗? 第四，九自己的自述 :工革报发布室: 结果第二天 我给他交代的事情 没有一条反馈 这不是终止合作是什么?工解先接触九，再快速判断完九的性质之后顷刻切割，然后工革报这边是什么情况呢?不仅看…
💩11👍9🤮1
Photo, posted without a caption
💩6🌭4
本文中 https://forum.cmlmuf.org/t/topic/505 之前参加过一些革命活动，但是遭受过中修的打击，不愿意继续参加革命活动; 比较在意自身前途，认为自己可以找到较为满意的工作又或是想要加入中修的党。 这样的人最多是进步群众，他们本来就没有革命的要求，能发动起来在现阶段参与革命，几乎不可能。 还有 1.不愿意放弃学业，认为靠它能过上好生活 。 2.对于革命不愿意参加，害怕失败自己会出问题而不愿意参与。 3.认为制度恶心但自己又没办法改变，不如投机过好生活，学业情况在中上水平。 4.对学校教育方式持负面评价，对西方教育有好感。 我的大概方向是让他知道想过好的生活靠投机是没有意义的，这个方向有没有错误？ 让他知道想过好的生活靠投机是没有意义的，但他们就算知道又如何？这样的人甚至不是进步的，现阶段花太多时间在他们身上是没有意义的。
🤣9👎5✍3💩3❤2👍2🤨1😁1
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @revolutionbigpost. 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 15 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“革命大字报墙” (@revolutionbigpost), 575 subscribers as measured 15 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/revolutionbigpost.
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.