Willow Creek did not register with me because you did not communicate it well enough...even after I said I could not follow, your reply to that did not provide a Latitude-Longitude for Willow Creek, and I was/am not about to get an Atlas to try and find this. If you want to make it easy for people who do not live in northern California, or may not even live in the U.S, you may want to always use Lat-Long in predictions, and then when the prediction period ends, wait a few days to make sure all quakes have made the lists, and then post a specific self-evaluation of the prediction. Meaning: repeat the prediction, and then say which earthquake best matched the prediction. That would give someone like me a better feel of whether I think a prediction is any good or not. But, I still would not do anything with this, or even be able to have more than a vague feeling that a prediction is good or not. Someone like Roger would have to evaluate all your predictions....and last time I suggested that, you threw a fit. So, apparently you want us to just blindly take your opinion that you are consistently predicting earthquakes better than chance. I don't work that way....I don't think most good scientists work that way. If you want to be taken seriously you have to work the way scientists work, not the other way around.
Chris