The DAO: Stalker Attack - Attacker split from childDAO?

Question

I had a question about the argument in this article Why The Stalker Attack is a Non Issue.

In the scenario the article describes, there is a "Victim" and an "Attacker". The Victim tries to split from The DAO to convert his TDT to ETH. The Attacker wants to prevent the Victim from doing so (& potentially excise a ransom). To split, the Victim creates a Split proposal and the Attacker votes Yes. Assume in the child-DAO, the Attacker has more TDT than the Victim.

The article suggests that this is a "high-risk" endeavor for the Attacker - why? Couldn't the Attacker simply create a new Split proposal from the victim's childDAO at any point & mark himself as curator of the new childDAO?

Answer 1

According to this paper, the Attacker could simply create a new Split proposal and withdraw as explained. Worse still, it is not only a matter of the people who have "voted YES" committing a Stalker attack - anyone on the Public Blockchain could have purchased TDT of the Child DAO during the 28-day crowdfunding period.

Per the paper: "The attacker places no funds at risk, because she can split from the child-DAO at any time before the depth limit is reached"