You have a dispute with someone (small claim, divorce, ...). Instead of going with the gov't court you open an arbitration case on judge.me where you ask some i

You have a dispute with someone (small claim, divorce, ...). Instead of going with the gov't court you open an arbitration case on judge.me where you ask some internet user(s) to judge you. You agree to stick to the ruling, if not your public profile will mention that unwillingness and you won't be able to use judge.me again (social coercion) in disputes with anyone who "follows" the judges you ignore. This is called kritarchy, rule by judges. The basis for this is not "law" by force, but voluntary cooperation so you don't get excluded from the community (subcommunities). The judges are the community leaders, what we today call politicians. The judges themselves compete for the arbitration cases by their price/efficiency/ideology, and whatever "market outcome" is the result of supply and demand becomes the "common law". I expect most people not to accept certain judges. E.g. I would ignore a ruling by a communist judge that they can use my car and would prefer to be excluded from the communist communities. If the entire world would operate like this you'd get "polycentric law", i.e. instead of battling with promises of how good your ideology is in elections you compete with the results (standard of living) your ideology provides in practice.