According to my analysis, the core of the NAP appears to be desirable and undesirable relationships.

There are two additional pieces of the puzzle that most AnCaps and Voluntarists seem to agree with, though not necessarily placed as part of the NAP.

Restitution

Many ancient, non-government, or civil societies have resorted to restitution as the corner-stone of dispute resolution, deterring crime, and repairing damages caused. Restitution typically involves a transfer of property from the violator to the victim, but causes no "damage" beyond the property transfer.

In contrast, punishment, such as jail, results in lost productivity or other damages to the violator, while doing little to repair what was done to the victim. Worse, the punishments are typically paid for using the victim's (or "society's") resources, and cause a significant net-loss of wealth.

Proportional

Murdering someone for stealing a slice of bread is generally considered an extreme response. Slapping a hand that attempts to steal your wallet is generally considered NOT an extreme response.

One advantage of a proportional is that if avoid causing excess harm to the alleged violator, especially if a mistake, misinterpretation, or misattribution have been made. While this would ideally be sorted out through arbitration, mistakes happen and corruption can occur (i.e. false witnesses, paid off judges, etc).

Obviously, the above concepts are not new to voluntarism or dispute resolution.... but i am curious to what thoughts you have on this subject.