LCDN, Interestingly, this particular term has been the one most scrutinized so far. By 'default', I meant the universal potentiality. Here is what I had replied to one of the members of ND group regarding the question you have repeated here. ....-jee, I am not sure if default is the best way to describe it, however potentiality was what was meant by it. Everybody is potentially corrupt. And the reason, as you explained, is simple- it is related to man's survival and pleasure. In absence of penalty, everybody will be corrupt. Of course there is inherent self-penalty, for example, sense of guilt. However, in a real world, it is primarily the fear of external penalty, that prevents a man from being corrupt. So the discussion on corruption is primarily about the penalty. And when we say penalty, the idea of defining it (legislation), the idea of investigation (finding out where it is happening, not where the potential source is), idea of justice, all are included in it. However, my major point regarding Nepal's failure to take care of (why am I even using this word ? who is really after taking care of it ?) corruption is what I termed 'lack of a point of beginning' or lack of a point of total power and freedom. This is the root cause of our failure regarding corruption. And as I said elsewhere, I am bewildered with our expert's failure to recognize this point.(This refers to my criticism of Prof. Bohora's following article in one of earlier discussions: - http://www.peacejournalism.com/ReadArticle.asp?ArticleID=105 ) Corruption in Nepal is so extensive and rooted, some patch work is not going to take care of it. I think we need to think it in terms of a road map just like the one for democracy. This continues with my 'roadmap' in the original posting above. ____