From: leo waaijers <[log in to unmask]> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 08:31:04 +0200 Just to confirm Jean-Claude’s experience. We also approached Beall for a list of ISSNs of predatory journals, so that we might indicate these journals in Quality Open Access Market like we do with DOAJ’s Seals of Approval. He replied that he did not have such a list. Period. Leo Waaijers Op 11-6-2017 om 20:11 schreef LIBLICENSE: From: "Jean-Claude Guédon" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 18:34:18 -0400 Beall's list could have done so much good work if he had accepted collaborating with other, complementary, organizations, such as DOAJ. I suggested this to him, once, but in vain. he did not even respond or explain why he would not do such a thing. It must never be forgotten that Beall's list never clearly distinguished between bad publications and open access publications, particularly if the latter did not originate with a well known, preferably Western-based, publisher. Hindawi temporarily fell victim to this kind of behaviour. So did the Scielo platform, once described as publishing "favelas" by Beall. By muddying th waters as much as he did, Beall did at least as much harm as he did good. Jean-Claude Guidon Le jeudi 08 juin 2017 à 20:09 -0400, LIBLICENSE a écrit : From: Byron Russell <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 08:17:53 +0000 I quite agree. It was too easy (or lazy?) to see the list as being the go-to place for information about predatory publishers, several of whom – bona fide academic publishers – are hosted by Ingenta Connect, which gave rise to some concern as to what exactly the compiler’s parameters were. Like the DOAJ, we prefer to carry our own vetting procedures when approached by new publishers seeking our hosting services. Byron Byron Russell Head of Ingenta Connect Ingenta Tel. +44 (0)1865 397881 Mob. +44 (0)7900 494258