\r\n\r\nI'll try to outline, till @vikiival pick this up\r\n- Currently, we will use KSM as currency for buying and selling \r\n- Users can use whatever currency they want for transaction fees, but just KSM to buy/list/sell NFTs. Later there will be available any other currencies on Basilisk (KSM, BSX, aUSD and others)\r\n- Goal is for the user doesn't need to care about the fee payment currency \r\n- If you transfer KSM to Basilisk and it's your new account, it will automatically switch to payment for fees in KSM\r\n",[3133,3134,3136],{"name":3089,"color":3024},{"name":3135,"color":3038},"A-basilisk",{"name":3037,"color":3038},3881,"More comprehensive writing on current Basilisk Rococo implementation","2023-10-16T14:37:38Z","https://github.com/kodadot/nft-gallery/issues/3881",0.73320913,{"description":3143,"labels":3144,"number":3146,"owner":3026,"repository":3027,"state":3051,"title":3147,"updated_at":3148,"url":3149,"score":3150},"we've had some issues with multiple sorting options before, the feature got introduced here:\r\n- https://github.com/kodadot/nft-gallery/pull/3067\r\n\r\nlater was fixed (in a hacky way) to not allow conflicting options at once (such as price high to low and price low to high at once) here:\r\n- https://github.com/kodadot/nft-gallery/pull/3325\r\n\r\nsome questions / things to figure out before this can be properly labeled, picked up, and refined:\r\n\r\n1. Even though, passing multiple search params was allowed, what is the desired outcome? As an example, @roiLeo comment from #3067\r\n\r\n> Tested on /rmrk/explore?page=1&tab=GALLERY&search=&sort=PRICE_DESC&sort=EMOTES_COUNT_DESC&listed=true\r\n\r\nwhat do you actually expect to see there? Maybe it's just me but I'm having hard time imaging the desired result. Is it first sorted by price? (desc) and then sorted by number of emotes...? I actually don't know what should the fetched data look like. Do we really want this? I think I'm not alone in this confusion, but please, provide your feedback. Right now, to me it seems, that the first param is the one which is sorting and the second one is not taken into consideration.\r\n\r\n2. thanks to @cryptodamsky comment from #3507: \r\n> Ok, i’m just saying that the term \"serial number ascending\" doesn’t make sense to end user AND it doesn’t work when I click it.\r\n\r\nseems that Serial Number Ascending, indeed, isn't working correctly, although it is sorted in some way, it's not an intuitive one + I'm not really sure on which basis are the serial numbers attached to the NFTs and why would that be interesting to anybody. I don't think more is necessarily better in this case, the filter has too many options already.\r\n\r\n\r\nI'm not saying we have to do it like this, but some inspiration, with many less options, and in my opinion, cleaner UI (I've cut out filtering which we don't provide):\r\n\r\nOpenSea search | LooksRare search\r\n:-------------------------:|:-------------------------:\r\n | \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n",[3145],{"name":3087,"color":3038},3523,"Sorting in Gallery/Collections - revisited","2023-12-22T10:55:09Z","https://github.com/kodadot/nft-gallery/issues/3523",0.73374003,["Reactive",3152],{},["Set"],["ShallowReactive",3155],{"$fTRc1wZytZ_XrK4EfJfei_Sz-An4H4Yy6syhVxH_PVJc":-1,"$ftWmo95nB1xhChi0DiN8EZn_nWDaJTpiCXtUJnKZCfUY":-1},"/kodadot/nft-gallery/4642"]