It has been an uphill battle for me in trying to explain this that there really are two uses for money: store-of-value and medium-of-exchange, and that it is possible to cleanly separate the two. It's even been done successfully before, most famously in the town of Wörgl between 1932 and 1934.

Keynes centered his attention on the macroeconomy and used inflation to grease its wheels. Hayek focused on the individual and the value of a deflationary currency at that scale. Gesell showed that these are not, in fact, competing visions and by separating store-of-value from medium-of-exchange you could have your cake and eat it too.

I agree there are two uses for money. If I have a choice between being paid in a form of currency that can do both, why would I voluntarily accept a form of currency that can only do one?

That is why would anyone voluntarily accept Freicoin over any other currency?

I guess my main question is: why would people voluntarily choose to use a medium of exchange that loses value over time? Does it require force by government to make people use this currency, or is there a reason they would start using it by themselves? Said another way: how would I benefit from using a medium of exchange that slowly loses its value?