Channel
@valentinmkl
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
2,783subscribers
-13 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001653293251 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @valentinmkl |
| Created | 28 February 2022 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 1 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 9 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 2 times, most recently 1 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/valentinmkl |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 29 Aug 2026, 08:27 | 2,783 | +1 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 23:46 | 2,782 | -3 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 08:49 | 2,785 | -3 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 10:59 | 2,788 | +2 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 17:13 | 2,786 | -5 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 11:56 | 2,791 | -3 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 12:01 | 2,794 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 17:12 | 2,795 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 04:45 | 2,796 | first reading |
9 posts held, back to 9 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 2 pages 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 9 posts for this entry, the most recent from 3 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Measured directly from 2 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.
260 reactions across 8 posts, in 20 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 37.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 97 | 37.3% | |
| 🔥 | 61 | 23.5% | |
| 👍 | 33 | 12.7% | |
| 💯 | 21 | 8.08% | |
| 🦄 | 11 | 4.23% | |
| 👏 | 6 | 2.31% | |
| 🤯 | 6 | 2.31% | |
| 😐 | 5 | 1.92% | |
| ❤🔥 | 3 | 1.15% | |
| 🗿 | 3 | 1.15% | |
| 🤝 | 3 | 1.15% | |
| ⚡ | 2 | 0.769% | |
| 🥴 | 2 | 0.769% | |
| custom 5346264514264327731 | 1 | 0.385% | |
| 🆒 | 1 | 0.385% | |
| 🍌 | 1 | 0.385% | |
| 🐳 | 1 | 0.385% | |
| 💊 | 1 | 0.385% | |
| 🕊 | 1 | 0.385% | |
| 🥰 | 1 | 0.385% |
Custom emoji. One row above is a 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 count beside it is 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 8 of the 9 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 260 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 9 most recent posts we hold, published 9 July 2026 to 3 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.
Почему крутые ИИ-модели НЕ убьют традиционный софт? Урок истории от Джорджа Пульмана 🚂 Недавно по совету друга Хольгера Цшайге прочитал пост о Леопольде Ашенбреннере (экс-OpenAI), который "слил" миллиарды долларов своего фонда. Он сделал простую ставку: шортил (ставил на падение) софтверных гигантов вроде Adobe, Salesforce. Он открыто диклалировал: «ИИ умеет писать код, а значит, традиционный софт больше не нужен».…
❤11👍9🤝3❤🔥2💯2⚡1🦄1
Валентин Микляев pinned a photo
Сделать можно всё, что угодно, когда есть цель и воля. Мне кажется, что западная бизнес мысль ориентирована на захват/уничтожения ресурса соперника при сражении, а китайская на управление его волей. Сужу на основе литературы, истории, сми. В Китае сильно Воля важнее ресурса. Но воля всегда служит цели. Решил собрать кресло? Сделай хорошо! PS Осталось покрасить)
❤13🔥11👍3💯2🕊1🦄1
Таск-менеджер для юр отдела В прошлом посте я писал, что таск-менеджер noroots сокращает путь договора между инициатором и юристом. Юрист получает договор. А что дальше? Что это за сделка? Зачем она бизнесу? О чем договорились с контрагентом? Какой результат нужен инициатору? Начинаются вопросы, переписки, созвоны. Юрист сначала восстанавливает контекст и только потом проверяет договор. А иногда после всех уточн…
💯9❤6🔥4👍1👏1
Быстро проверить договор — недостаточно Недавно разбирали путь обычного договора внутри компании. Инициатор получает документ от контрагента и отправляет юристу. Юрист проверяет его и возвращает инициатору. Тот пересылает контрагенту. Контрагент вносит изменения — новая версия снова идёт юристу. Между этими действиями еще появляются письма, сообщения, вопросы. Сам анализ договора может занять 20 минут, а с noroots…
❤10👍4🔥3
Каждый день на Курилах снились интересные сны: …горбатые киты, нерпы, медведи, скалы, океан и многое другое… Работа тоже присутствует. В одну ночь проснулся с желанием подумать - начал изучать зарубежные подходы к Vendor Due Diligence (оценка поставщиков перед заключением сделок). Мне очень понравилась логика рискориентиррованного скорринга контрагентов. В ее базе лежит создание матрицы рисков, на основе параметро…
🔥23❤16🦄5🍌1🐳1
Ответственность Я доверяю профессионалам: - в организации досуга и путешествий - в бизнес консультациях и юридической помощи - в ремонте - в медицинской помощи - обучении Проблема в том, что профи мало в любой сфере. Так было еще до эпохи ИИ. Но не стоит винить проводника, аналитика, адвоката в ваших неудачах. Да, все неудачи - это наши неудачи ! ( Это наш выбор оказался в том или ином и ситуации. Для себя я сфо…
❤18🔥12👍7👏5❤🔥1🦄1custom 53462645142643277311
Пользователь знает продукт лучше создателя? Сегодня провели вебинар с Айгуль Кашаповой, директором юридического департамента Delko. С noroots у Delko длинная и очень интересная история. В конце 2024 компания победила в премии журнала «Корпоративный юрист» в номинации «Оптимизация юридических процессов» и получила доступ к нашему сервису в подарок. Попробовали. Потом продлили подписку еще на год. Сейчас в системе р…
❤11👍8🔥8⚡1🦄1🆒1
«Политическая» воля В 2019 году я вместе с парой IT-компаний качал идею регистрации гостей отелей без паспорта через Госуслуги. В 2022 году я приблизился к этому очень близко. Познакомился с Мариной Солодовой, которая развивала проект «Госключ». Кстати, она тот человек, благодаря которому мы скоро будем иметь идентификацию по биометрии везде: в поездах, самолетах, МФЦ и т. д. В 2022 году мы стали одними из первых …
❤12💯8🤯6😐5🗿3🥴2🦄2👍1
Showing the 9 most recent of 9 posts we hold for @valentinmkl. 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.
Citation-graph rank — 549,344 of 1,629,571 entries 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.
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.
Named by 4 registered channels — 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.
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.
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.
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.
“Валентин Микляев” (@valentinmkl), 2,783 subscribers as measured 29 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/valentinmkl.
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.