For the longest time I called myself an anarcho-capitalist.
At some point, I dropped the capitalist and started using the term voluntaryist.
Because I'd be more than happy to have anyone who believes in voluntaryism as a neighbor over someone that believes in authoritarianism.
The real divide is whether or not you believe in equal, inherent, and inalienable rights for all people or you believe that some people (or some group of people) have rights that others do not have (e.g. the right to rule).
Seriously considering the idea of law (not man made law, but logical law with the basis of equal, inherent and inalienable rights for all people) has moved me more towards the communalism side simply because while I do believe that people should be able to use earth to live (absolutely necessary...) I also believe that letting some people claim huge tracts of lands invariably leads to some form of slavery.
I had a very long conversation some years ago (when I used the term anarcho-capitalist) with someone that called themselves an anarcho-syndicalist.
At the end of our discussion/debate, we found that we'd each be happy to have the other as neighbors because we both strongly believed in voluntary cooperation.
Many of the "divisive" issues are nothing at all... provided everyone agrees that none have the right to use force on others.
Anywise, just a thought as I still see those who promote voluntaryism (and call themselves anarcho-*) arguing with each other a lot.... why not worry about minor details once the states are gone? In the mean time we can focus our energies on the real schism of authoritarianism vs true equality.