I saw this several years ago. I remember Adam's assertion that suits like the property damage claim for pollution victims discussed here could be handled privately without the intervention of courts through ostracism and private dispute resolution sounded ridiculous.
Fast forward to today. I've spent some time as a cog in the justice. Turns out, most suits are resolved privately either through mediators or arbitrators that the courts appoint. So while he is right that it can be done, its the government itself that arranges these. There's something there, I just don't know what exactly.
Also, ostracism comes from a Greek word for "stone," I believe, because periodically the Athenians would hold a vote to see if anyone in the city deserved to get kicked out for being obnoxious, and they used stones as ballots. I highly doubt an anarchist would approve of formal ostracism if it existed still in the way it was originally conceived. Oh, and one of those eventually voted out was Pericles. So, yeah, look how well that worked...
Just because the courts appoint arbitrators doesn't mean that they wouldn't be properly and voluntary appointed by all parties in the dispute, in the absence of government.
And that's how disputes will be settled in the future, once the justice system is seen as the obsolete piece of stone-aged trash it is.
Do you think all disputes can be resolved this way? I think the gulf between anarchists and libertarian-esque ideologies rests with whether disputes can be resolved without the weight of force suspended over the negotiations and what could happen when you lift the lid off completely. The reason mandated arbitration/mediation works so well, I think, is that no one wants to deal with litigation because it brings down that heavy hand.
I think all disputes could be solved that way, but most likely won't be. Some things will still be solved with guns, although in a society with individual responsibility for security and an absence of crime schools (prisons), as well as an unhindered and free market, the idea is that no one would become so desperate as to put others into a situation which would require guns to resolve.