Technology — 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 21 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 99% 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
51 measurements spanning 82 days, net -2,953. 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 80,545–84,384 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 51
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
27 Oct 2026, 00:57
80,988
-32
26 Oct 2026, 04:16
81,020
-46
25 Oct 2026, 02:17
81,066
-43
24 Oct 2026, 03:26
81,109
-39
23 Oct 2026, 01:18
81,148
-36
22 Oct 2026, 00:58
81,184
-27
20 Oct 2026, 21:48
81,211
-42
20 Oct 2026, 00:06
81,253
-42
19 Oct 2026, 00:48
81,295
-44
17 Oct 2026, 21:55
81,339
-21
17 Oct 2026, 00:29
81,360
-23
16 Oct 2026, 03:10
81,383
-25
15 Oct 2026, 05:26
81,408
-34
13 Oct 2026, 23:38
81,442
-111
10 Oct 2026, 22:41
81,553
-130
6 Oct 2026, 21:38
81,683
-143
2 Oct 2026, 00:39
81,826
-467
18 Sept 2026, 15:20
82,293
-75
16 Sept 2026, 08:58
82,368
-58
14 Sept 2026, 16:37
82,426
first reading
Engagement
390 posts held, back to 4 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 166 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
6.17%
avg views ÷ 80,988 subscribers
Avg views / post
5,000
136 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.49%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
136
of 390 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 26 October 2026
Posts held
390 (4 August 2026 – 26 October 2026)
Views total
679,590
Reactions total
10,118
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
26 Oct 2026, 17:37 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
1h 53m
Average length
46s
Measured directly from 147 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
27,916 reactions across 390 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 40.6% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
😁
11,345
40.6%
❤
8,836
31.7%
👍
3,941
14.1%
🔥
2,249
8.06%
🥰
829
2.97%
👏
716
2.56%
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 390 of the 390 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 27,916 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 390 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 26 October 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.
Лох может сгореть. И это не шутка.
Российское село с таким названием третий день под угрозой лесных пожаров. Сейчас местные сами тушат огонь, подвозят воду на собственной технике.
Но все же сами жители не справляются и просят прислать дополнительные расчеты. Часть семей уже покинула село.
Лоховчане, держитесь 😘
Напоминалка: на следующей неделе россиян ждет четырехдневка. Дополнительный выходной будет 4 ноября в честь Дня народного единства.
Держитесь за эту мысль, коллеги 😘
Больше 70% российских мужчин готовы уйти в декрет. Они заявляют, что запросто бы поменялись с женами местами.
52% выбрали бы отпуск по уходу, если жена зарабатывает больше. Еще 20% просто хотят больше времени с ребенком. Но 23% считают, что младенцами должны заниматься исключительно женщины.
Девочки, верим? 🗒️
Россияне начали дарить губернаторам подарки в Телеграме. Все, чтобы донести свои проблемы или похвалить лидера.
По данным Baza, люди уже накидали подарков на 20 тыс. звезд. Больше всех получил Кадыров — 234 подарка. Хинштейн (Курская область) собрал 54, Никитин (Нижегородская область) — 45. Всего презенты нашли у 20 глав регионов.
В подарках просят помощи, благодарят чиновников и даже рекламируют свои проекты.
Так…
Российские зумеры бьют себя молотками по лицу. Все ради скул.
Пишут, что уже больше 100 пострадавших. У этого явления даже есть название — бонсмэшинг, оно популярно среди луксмаксеров: парни верят, что удары сделают лицо мужественнее.
На деле один получил кровоизлияние, другой — онемение лица.Врачи предупреждают: вместо красивых скул можно заработать перелом челюсти, повреждение глаз и рубцы.
Кто-то слишком буквал…
Умер тот самый Миша Маваши. Ему был 41 год.
Причина — несчастный случай, по словам его знакомого. В то же время появились слухи, что рэпер совершил суицид: его доставили в больницу с огнестрельным ранением, однако спасти ее успели.
😐😐😐
Китайская реклама русского магазина выглядит как «симулятор инсульта». Нейронка очень плохо справилась с русским языком. Ролик с кривыми словами и произношением завирусился в WeChat.
Это что, панславянский? 😮
Девушки теперь «режут головы» мужьям. Чтобы не сглазить.
В Threads завирусились свадебные фото, на которых женихи — без головы. Первый пост собрал волну реакций — теперь тренд подхватили другие.
Это какая-то метафора? 😐
Оземпик может бить по продажам пива. Heineken уже переживает и меняет правила игры.
Американские семьи, где кто-то принимает препараты для похудения, тратят на пиво на 13,5% меньше остальных. Heineken уже советует британским пабам менять меню: наливать полпинты вместо целой кружки и активнее предлагать безалкогольные напитки.
Такой подставы пивозавры не ждали 😣
Новый складной iPhone трещит по швам. Прямо в магазинах.
Пользователи из Китая, Австралии, Японии и других стран публикуют фото iPhone Duo с полосой на сгибе дисплея. По сообщениям, такие случаи происходят даже в торговых точках.
В Apple Store неисправные устройства сразу меняют по гарантии. А вот в России, где официальной продажи нет, с ремонтом и заменой все может оказаться куда сложнее.
То есть все-таки не обно…
😁48🔥5❤4👍4
Showing the 12 most recent of 390 posts we hold for @yumdigital. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@yumdigital edited 5 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
11 August 2026
Most recent edit
1 September 2026
Forward network
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.
Mentions
Named by 1 registered channel — 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.
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.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 18 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
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.
таскам время, потехе час @poteha_time · 433,585 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 73 here — alongside 72 others — read 10 August 2026
The X | Media @thexmed · 24,970 Telegram ranks this channel #15 of 80 here — alongside 79 others — read 13 September 2026
Бэкспейс @backspace_mag · 123,953 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 13 August 2026
0% токсичности @stop_toxic · 34,022 Telegram ranks this channel #86 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 3 September 2026
This channel appears in 4 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 27 October 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Yumi” (@yumdigital), 80,988 subscribers as measured 27 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/yumdigital.
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.