Your claim that this is incorrect is incorrect, because it does generate your forced tax at the current moment. But it will not soon, and it will block all of your foundation (aka "federal freicoin reserve", a private, exclusive group with 80% control of the monetary supply) will be blacklisted.
?
That sentence doesn't even make sense. You've made a hard-fork. Blocks created by your client are rejected by the network. Nodes running your client get blacklisted by the rest of the network for forwarding invalid blocks as a denial-of-service protection. The OP incorrectly implies otherwise. You could have million times the hash of the rest of the network and it wouldn't matter.
We've said this so many times I've simply given up on repeating myself. But here it goes once more: every single satoshi of the Foundation outputs will be given out in grants in an open, transparent process. You can take part in that discussion here:
http://www.freicoin.org/freicoin-foundation-development-thread-t81.htmlOr simply start drafting your own grant proposal.
1. Somehow you're failing to comprehend it. Blocks created by this client will not be rejected by "the network" at the moment.
There isn't just the network. There is multiple networks. Let's call it the Central Freicoin Reserve network. We have this Open Decentralized Network. These two networks will conflict, but the blissful days of expecting nobody will fork an open source project like you did for bitcoin are over.
2. Blocks created by YOUR (80% goes for you to spend on a "open transparent process" see later) client will be rejected by this network, which will beat "your" network simply because people will migrate given the choice. I like how you (not singular, but foundation) think you own Freicoin, the network, and all coins, which is probably why you decided to even come up with this 80% idea. No. This, along with every bitcoin fork, is an open source project.
3. It just takes a few pools to see the benefits in making Freicoin more decentralized, secure, and better for miners (vs better for your foundation). Your claim would have some merit if everyone has a fair say into the matter, because it's not hard to see that the Foundation won't reject anything that benefits them or their members. Like Congress passing themselves a pay increase - some members would vote no to appear better knowing that it will pass, but they all want it.
Open transparent process? Heck, go look at what happened with OpenOffice and LibreOffice. Sure, open source and stuff, but people migrate if you decide to eat the cake selfishly.