Questions about Question of the Week
Stalking. I was discussing this with my flatmate last night. We were trying to reconcile the disparity between the legal definition and the etymology of stalking which we were assuming has a basis in hunting.

On the surface they appear extrememly similar, involving the pursuit of prey. However, the legal definition seems to be about harassment whereas the hunting term involves silent pursuit in order to not be discovered. So, if the legal term derives from the hunting one, why does one involve the agressor being visible and the other relies on his/her total discretion? Hmmm.

It would be interesting to switch the two around so that the ducks get harassed and the people don't. Actually, no, that's a bad idea - forewarned is forearmed.

/musing
(crackhouseceilidhband So I'm going back down to the Adios Lounge, Fri 1 Feb 2008, 10:38, closed)

...
Maybe we only ever know about the rubbish stalkers. The good ones go undetected... eeep!
( Enzyme is in ur [noun]z, [verb]in' ur [noun]z, Fri 1 Feb 2008, 10:51, )

further question.
How would you harass a duck?
( althegeordie thinks it's all about location, location, location, Fri 1 Feb 2008, 13:39, )

^ is the punchline
"enough to drive it quackers"?

*ducks*
(crackhouseceilidhband So I'm going back down to the Adios Lounge, Fri 1 Feb 2008, 14:38, )

Well
I'll try not to get in a flap about such terrible puns.
( althegeordie thinks it's all about location, location, location, Fri 1 Feb 2008, 15:07, )