Literature — 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 15 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 92% 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
10 measurements spanning 29 days, net -70. 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 2,553–2,644 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
16 Sept 2026, 23:22
2,563
-4
12 Sept 2026, 15:17
2,567
-7
8 Sept 2026, 15:17
2,574
-18
3 Sept 2026, 18:20
2,592
-6
31 Aug 2026, 05:25
2,598
+2
28 Aug 2026, 05:04
2,596
-8
25 Aug 2026, 05:17
2,604
-12
22 Aug 2026, 09:06
2,616
-16
19 Aug 2026, 03:13
2,632
-1
18 Aug 2026, 14:45
2,633
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 3 August 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 18 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
20s
Average length
20s
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
298 reactions across 19 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 40.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
120
40.3%
😭
66
22.1%
👍
28
9.40%
❤🔥
24
8.05%
🔥
22
7.38%
👀
12
4.03%
💘
11
3.69%
😁
8
2.68%
🤨
4
1.34%
🍾
1
0.336%
👏
1
0.336%
🤝
1
0.336%
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 19 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 298 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 3 August 2026 to 18 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.
من هیچوقت با نویسنده و این مجموعه مشکلی نداشتم
الانم اگه این پست رو گذاشتم برای اینه که خودمم تازه فهمیدم و خواستم اطلاعرسانی کنم نه اینکه هیت بدم…
ولی اینبار بازش میکنیم ببینیم اصلاً چرا همچین اتهاماتی روی این کتابه
تازه فقط هوشمصنوعی نیست
سرقت ادبی!
سلام الهام
ببین منم توی یوتیوب برای ناتوان یه نقد گذاشتم و اونجا هم کلی فحش خوردم. چون منم دقیقا از مجموعه خوشم نیومد حتی باعث شد تا مدت ها وارد اسلامپ بشم. الان هم دارن فن ها با مدرک این بحث استفاده اش از هوش مصنوعی و سرقت های ادبی و تکرارهای به شدت واضح اش از مجموعه های دیگه رو میگن. واقعا بیا درموردش حرف بزنیم. چون به عنوان یه نویسنده شما بهتر میدونی واقعا دوست دارم نظرت رو بدونم.
بچهها مامان من یه جراحی باید انجام میداد
درگیر ملکهم هستم
برای همهی مریضها دعا کنید
برای مامان منم دعا کنید زودتر حالش کامل خوب بشه که بیام پیشتون🙂❤️
https://t.me/writerelie/7152
عه من آبانماهیها رو خیلی دوست دارم. عشقن 🥰
پس واسه همینه که از اول، کانالت به دلم نشست. اصن همین که خودت پرانرژی هستی، حس خوب بهم منتقل میکنی🔥
من چون خودم آبانیم
عقربها همیشه برام جالب بودن و راجعبهشون میخوندم
خودبهخود دیدم سناریویی که تو ذهنمه خیلی به عقرب و خصوصیات اخلاقیشون شبیهه
ولی از همه جالبتر برام این بوده همیشه که عقربها دفاعی عمل میکنن نه تهاجمی.
یعنی اگه نیش بزنن برای دفاع هستش.
کاریشون نداشته باشی کاریت ندارن.
کلاً درعینحال که ترسناکن خیلی کاریزما دارن✨😂
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @writerelie. 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.
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.
شهر کتاب @nbookcity · 31,847 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 68 here — alongside 67 others — read 5 September 2026
Anousha @anousha_eternal · 82,760 Telegram ranks this channel #51 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 18 August 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 16 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“-Writer’s planet-” (@writerelie), 2,563 subscribers as measured 16 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/writerelie.
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.