[BUG] : Blog Filters Not Working Correctly (Category & Link Issues)

[Sourya07]

Describe the bug.

The blog filter functionality is not working as expected. When applying filters such as Conference, Community, or other categories, the filtered results are incorrect or incomplete. Additionally, after applying any filter, blog post or any links stop working and cannot be opened.
make sure you filter more than 1 time.

This makes it difficult to browse content using filters and breaks basic navigation.

Expected behavior

•	The selected filter should display only the relevant blog posts (e.g., Conference-related posts).
•	Blog cards and titles should remain fully clickable.
•	Navigation to the blog detail page should work normally after filtering.

Screenshots

Screen.Recording.2026-01-07.at.4.34.33.AM.mov

How to Reproduce

1.	Navigate to the Blog page
2.	Open the category filter dropdown
3.	Select any filter such as:
•	Conference
•	Community
 make sure you have filter more than 2 times.
4.	Observe the filtered blog list
5.	Click on any blog card or blog title after filtering

🖥️ Device Information [optional]

• Operating System (OS):
• Browser:
• Browser Version:

👀 Have you checked for similar open issues?

• I checked and didn't find similar issue

🏢 Have you read the Contributing Guidelines?

• I have read the Contributing Guidelines

Are you willing to work on this issue ?

Yes I am willing to submit a PR!

[Sourya07]

@princerajpoot20 look this issue (urgent) breaking the website

[Sam-61s]

Yes, the blog page filter is not working as expected.
This is a genuine issue, and it shuold be fixed soon!!

Let’s wait for maintainer approval before moving forward.

[sammy200-ui]

i think i did checked some weeks back and at that time it was working perfectly fine. But now you mentioned there is a glitch i looked around some recent prs found that in this pr #4766 the removal of any types made it a strict check and this issue occurred. @Sam-61s i believe you proposed that changes ,pls check before pushing the pr , if you removed code , does it break anything , is the functionality still the same

[Sourya07]

i think i did checked some weeks back and at that time it was working perfectly fine. But now you mentioned there is a glitch i looked around some recent prs found that in this pr #4766 the removal of any types made it a strict check and this issue occurred. @Sam-61s i believe you proposed that changes ,pls check before pushing the pr , if you removed code , does it break anything , is the functionality still the same

Yes, I’ve reviewed this.

[Sourya07]

once approved will make a pr

[Sam-61s]

i think i did checked some weeks back and at that time it was working perfectly fine. But now you mentioned there is a glitch i looked around some recent prs found that in this pr #4766 the removal of any types made it a strict check and this issue occurred. @Sam-61s i believe you proposed that changes ,pls check before pushing the pr , if you removed code , does it break anything , is the functionality still the same

Just to clarify, PR #4766 was only about improving type safety by removing any. There were no intentional logic changes, but stricter typing can sometimes reveal existing issues, which seems to have happened here.

Creating a dublicate issue doesn't make any sense. We can handle this bug under a single issue. In short, both issues describe the same problem from different perspectives:

#4893 → what is broken for users
#4895 → why it is broken

[sammy200-ui]

Hello @Sam-61s, that’s what I’m trying to say. Even if the proposal is to remove type safety, the usage of 'any' still needs to be addressed. 'any' is used to bypass type checks, and removing it can surface new issues that should be handled.

also closed #4895 , lets make in one

[princerajpoot20]

@Sourya07 Go ahead with the fix

@sammy200-ui Thanks for the help!!

[princerajpoot20]

Just to clarify, PR #4766 was only about improving type safety by removing any. There were no intentional logic changes, but stricter typing can sometimes reveal existing issues, which seems to have happened here.

@Sam-61s
This is not expected from your end. I expect a better response from you rather than just walking away from your responsibility. If you are removing any type to make it stricter, then it is totally your responsibility to check for any consequences that may happen. So please own the code you are writing. If you are making any changes, it is totally your responsibility to ensure that it does not introduce any regression.

[Sam-61s]

Hi @princerajpoot20,
You’re right — I take responsibility for this.
I’m sorry I didn’t catch that the blog filter was broken when making the any types stricter.
I’ll be more careful about validating behavior along with any changes of mine in codebase.