Canie;

You ask tough questions. I like that!

Unfortunately, the answer is often "I don't know" because our seismic history is so short. And some of it comes down to guesswork, pure and simple.

Evaluating a significant aftershock prediction is one of the tough ones. A 5.0 should get some credit; it's potentially damaging but as an aftershock, it can't very well get full credit. The answer would have to be arbitrary and the decision of the judges is final in such cases.

The second part is equally tough. Which is more dangerous, a quiet area or one having occasional quakes?

Again, it depends.

Some areas are quiet because the rocks are strong and unbroken which means tremendous stress can buils up, leading to a great (unexpected) quake.

Others are quiet because no strain has or is accumulating. No problem.

Some areas with frequent quakes are very dangerous because they are foreshocks.

Others have frequent quakes which release the stress so none builds up.

So the answer is "I don't know" to the general question.

Roger