I think it unfortunately seems to show (again!) that the folks doing/testing the coding don't actually play the game. I cannot imagine anyone who plays the game at anything more than a rudimentary level would have been satisfied with the new "default" sort for the specialist tab, or how the filters apply to many of the other tabs.
From a coding perspective, it's likely the code works exactly as it was designed to and there is some describable reason why an un-renamed Swift Supplier shows up in the midst of the different explorer types in the "default" sort (likely, the "specialist type" attribute behind the scenes causes this to happen in some sort of numerical ordering). What needs to happen, though, is someone with an understanding of the game (a player!) and a UI expert needs to sit down with the coders and explain how the PLAYERS view things (explorers - of different flavors - are all still explorers and expedition supply generals are something else) and the coding/attributes need to be set up to allow for a player-centric view, not a programmer-centric one. As another example, Adventures sorted by "type" means something to the player that is different than what it means to the programmer (thus why sorting adventures by type doesn't seem to work at all), but the UI needs to be designed around the players' perspective.
We aren't all going to agree 100% on what that *should* be, and some of us will end up using a workaround of some sort no matter what, but there's got to be a better "default" that might work for *most* without requiring *most/all* to use a workaround. What we currently have, isn't that.