So sorry, but anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron, and as I have already explained, anarcho-capitalists are economic fundamentalists.
Yes, I have read that material a while ago. Rather than do a point by point rebuttal because you seem to be interested more in spamming links and copypasta than having an open and honest dialogue I will save you time and point out one obvious flaw in the material you cite:
They try to define anarchism as being opposition to government, and nothing else.
If you bothered to read my posts and digest your own material you pasted you would see that I am arguing from first principles that you have yet to address:
1) Acknowledgement of {personal, with exceptions in regards to land}property rights and self ownership
2) adherence to the non-aggression principle
My concerns have less to do with economics and more to do with ethics.
Once you understand this than anarchism isn't just antagonistic against governments, but also corporations who use the power of the state to enforce monopolies with patents , copyrights, and a limited liability veil, gangs who use violence to shake down people, and individuals who violently harass their neighbors or family.
Additionally, I have never claimed allegiance to any -ism (at most, I believe certain variations of anarcho-cap or anarch-collective societies would probably function best) and am interested in your anarcho-communist test case example that you oddly fear pursuing.(If you have no like minded friends , my offer is still open to help you find people who think like you.
P.s.. investigate "No true Scotsman" as well