I agree the scholarly publication arena is a complex one with many problems. There is no magical single solution, and what will work for one individual journal or initiative won’t for another. It’s great to see an increasing number of journals, societies and organisations being open-minded and experimenting with different approaches. They can all, of course, do whatever they want, but I agree with you that the research communities they serve can, do and will choose where they submit, also who they review for.
The predatory/questionable journals issue is another complex area, more complicated than was originally thought. Easier to spot them within one’s own fields, but it can be difficult outside of those. Also in certain situations, eg for early-career researchers without good mentors, researchers in the global south (and many legitimate journals there can appear ‘predatory’ when assessed with some of the checklists being created; INASP is doing a lot of good work in this area) mixed-discipline/management position and promotion panels, assessing people’s CVs. I myself had problems with the last one recently – it took me a long time to go through a bibliography for someone in a different discipline when I had some concerns.