Gaming — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 8 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 98% 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.
Previous handles
@xukappodarok was previously reachable at this handle, before switching to its current one. This says nothing about who or what answers at the old handle today — only that this channel no longer does.
@xukapodarok held 12 August 2026 – 12 August 2026
Growth
265 measurements spanning 44 days, net -50,609. 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”.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 265
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
19 Sept 2026, 14:59
147,483
-736
19 Sept 2026, 10:38
148,219
no change
19 Sept 2026, 03:57
148,219
no change
19 Sept 2026, 02:54
148,219
+148,215
18 Sept 2026, 12:55
4
-161,117
18 Sept 2026, 04:36
161,121
-3,405
18 Sept 2026, 02:00
164,526
no change
17 Sept 2026, 23:41
164,526
-7,004
17 Sept 2026, 00:40
171,530
no change
16 Sept 2026, 21:58
171,530
-345
16 Sept 2026, 17:15
171,875
no change
16 Sept 2026, 15:17
171,875
-2,225
16 Sept 2026, 12:20
174,100
-2,749
15 Sept 2026, 21:00
176,849
-3
15 Sept 2026, 20:58
176,852
-657
15 Sept 2026, 16:39
177,509
-1,689
15 Sept 2026, 04:22
179,198
no change
15 Sept 2026, 01:42
179,198
no change
14 Sept 2026, 21:01
179,198
-376
14 Sept 2026, 20:01
179,574
first reading
Engagement
105 posts held, back to 29 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 70 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
10.1%
avg views ÷ 147,483 subscribers
Avg views / post
14,900
35 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.33%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
35
of 105 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.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 September 2026
Posts held
105 (29 July 2026 – 6 September 2026)
Views total
520,800
Reactions total
12,112
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Sept 2026, 11:23 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
3m 23s
Average length
18s
Measured directly from 11 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
35,307 reactions across 99 posts, in 49 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 9.20% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
3,247
9.20%
🦄
2,734
7.74%
🤣
2,290
6.49%
👀
2,057
5.83%
🕊
1,987
5.63%
🍓
1,882
5.33%
🐳
1,837
5.20%
😎
1,421
4.02%
🤔
1,147
3.25%
🏆
1,097
3.11%
👻
1,050
2.97%
🎃
913
2.59%
👍
904
2.56%
🤯
855
2.42%
👌
801
2.27%
🤝
789
2.23%
😭
785
2.22%
🤗
783
2.22%
🍾
742
2.10%
😱
700
1.98%
29 further kinds
7,286
20.6%
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 105 of the 105 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 38,154 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 105 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 6 September 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
4,102
across the posts below
Posts paid on
99
of 105 we hold a reading for · 94%
Most on one post
131
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @xukappodarok. 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 105 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 July 2026 to 6 September 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.
💳Павел Дуров опубликовал пост о раздаче денег💳
2 млн долларов от Telegram!
Павел Дуров написал пост, где рассказал, что всего за один месяц Telegram выделил более $2 222 000 одним из самых талантливых людей на планете — победителям конкурсов по дизайну и цифровой свободе, а также Международных олимпиад по информатике и ИИ
✈️КАНАЛ😊ЧАТ💬
❤Прочитав один из постов официального аккаунта тг в твитерре, пользователям сразу вспомнился ходивший по всем каналам кружок..💬
✈️КАНАЛ😊ЧАТ💬
🤑Купить подарок?
🔥Пока вы спите, другие выкупают редкие лоты за секунды!❤️🔥
🚀Aurex Gift Snipe — автоматическая скупка подарков
Наш снайпер сам ищет и выкупает нужные подарки на Portals и MRKT в реальном времени.
⚡️Высокая скорость — успевайте забирать предметы значительно дешевле рынка.
🤖Автоматическая покупка — не нужно постоянно следить за площадками.
💰Мы не берём процент с покупок.
Реальные покупки можно увидеть здесь: @aure…
😽Сам Охуенко говорит, что пора выпускать улучшения 😽
✈️КАНАЛ😊ЧАТ 💬
💸Купить подарок?
🐳110💊76👌60🍓32
Signed 乂υƘαツ
Showing the 12 most recent of 105 posts we hold for @xukappodarok. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Posts edited after publishing
@xukappodarok edited 9 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
9 August 2026
Most recent edit
6 September 2026
Forward network
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.
Mentions
Named by 26 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. The 23 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
2
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
1
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
1
vacant every time we have ever looked
@xukappodarok named 2 handles that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
@xykahat named in 109 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 September 2026 · confirmed gone 10 September 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@luckybear named in 1 post, 6 September 2026 – 6 September 2026
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 19 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“#Хᴀйᴩиᴋᴄ NFT” (@xukappodarok), 147,483 subscribers as measured 19 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/xukappodarok.
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.