Thanks everyone for the links and comments.
I do now have a recent version of Beall’s list, and apparently there are some efforts to update it.
Regrettably, one special loss is Beall’s commentary on why certain journals make the list and why others do not. I’m not looking for anything else to read, but it does help to know *why*, say, Beall included Omics in the list (Omics happens to top my spam filter list, BTW - I have several filters for various incarnations).
> A quick note that Beall’s list of predatory publishers has now been
> taken down from the internet.
> You can find the reported reason online, I won’t repeat it here.
> If someone has their own list, I’d appreciate a copy.
> Looks like we’re on our own now.