# Wrong sort option in the field value selection **URL:** \ **Category:** Bugs & Issues\ **Created:** [February 3, 2025, 1:28pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/wrong-sort-option-in-the-field-value-selection/8207 "2025-02-03T13:28:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Eugene\_Vabishchevich](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/eugene_vabishchevich/32/4310_2.png) [@Eugene\_Vabishchevich](https://community.fibery.io/u/Eugene_Vabishchevich)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 1:28pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/wrong-sort-option-in-the-field-value-selection/8207/1 "2025-02-03T13:28:43Z")
Hi guys, seems like you have a strange logic for sorting fields. We have a field “Marketing sprint” with values like Sprint 1, Sprint 2, etc. To see the latest sprint at the top, we’ve set a desc sort option. But the system doesn’t sort it in the correct way. Please see attached. ![Sort-in-field](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/fibery/original/2X/2/2dbb436ee8bc6e0a489515b44121cf68200938f0.jpeg) ---
**Author:** ![Chr1sG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/chr1sg/32/3941_2.png) [@Chr1sG](https://community.fibery.io/u/Chr1sG)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 2:47pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/wrong-sort-option-in-the-field-value-selection/8207/2 "2025-02-03T14:47:15Z")
When you are sorting the name, it is a sort being carried out on a text string, so if the string contains numbers, they will not be sorted in a way you might expect. When it comes to strings that contain numbers, ‘23’ comes before ‘3’. You might want to consider sorting on another field, e.g. creation date ---
**Author:** ![Eugene\_Vabishchevich](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/eugene_vabishchevich/32/4310_2.png) [@Eugene\_Vabishchevich](https://community.fibery.io/u/Eugene_Vabishchevich)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 3:09pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/wrong-sort-option-in-the-field-value-selection/8207/3 "2025-02-03T15:09:05Z")
I understand the logic and expected a similar response from you, but it’s good to have a bit of ‘human’ touch in cases like this. I don’t think we’re the only ones who feel this way. ---
**Author:** ![Chr1sG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/chr1sg/32/3941_2.png) [@Chr1sG](https://community.fibery.io/u/Chr1sG)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 3:38pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/wrong-sort-option-in-the-field-value-selection/8207/4 "2025-02-03T15:38:42Z")
> [@Eugene\_Vabishchevich](#): > > it’s good to have a bit of ‘human’ touch in cases like this. I don’t think we’re the only ones who feel this way. I’m not sure what you mean by this. Do you think that Fibery [should override the sorting logic](https://blog.codinghorror.com/sorting-for-humans-natural-sort-order/) for text strings? ---
**Author:** ![Michael\_Ichter](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/michael_ichter/32/9931_2.png) [@Michael\_Ichter](https://community.fibery.io/u/Michael_Ichter)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2025, 6:32am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/wrong-sort-option-in-the-field-value-selection/8207/5 "2025-02-04T06:32:42Z")
That’s a fun article. 🙂 As someone who’s been fairly deep in computers almost my whole life, the ASCIIbetical sort order isn’t that disruptive. Perhaps just a slight inconvenience (if I really cared, I would add zeros as place fillers for tens and hundreds digits). But I can see how most users today would be thrown off by it. And I agree with the idea that, from a UX perspective, natural sort order is simply better for any non-programming task. IMO, natural sort order should be the default, especially since it is the default in most other areas in a user’s life.