My humble (constructive) opinion is:

Thanks for the attempt (it's more than I'm doing) but .......

The forcast area is not clearly specified. In order for any forcast to be taken seriously, specific parameters must be given, namely place, window, & size. The forcast also has to be compared to historical data to rule out random chance, or at least put the forcast in perspective with regards to random chance. An accuracy rate or 63% doesn't mean anything to me. I could forcast "a 2.0 will occur in california every week for a whole year" and at the end of the year my accuracy rate would be 100%. "Accuracy Rate" simply doesn't have any value in earthquake prediction. Consistantly beating the random chance odds means everything.

It's sorta like vegas. If you repeatedly beat the random chance odds, then your probably on to something. If you fail to make the analysis against random chance in the first place, there's no chance of validity.

Michael