Fuck it, I'll talk to myself then...
Two things which grabbed me on the first reading were:
1) some good stuff about the suburbs (ie Trocchi's proposed launch of sigma in a place outside of but close to the city of London) and the part about Martin Denny, in which Hawaii's culture gets filtered through suburban wish fulfilment to become some sort of libidinal cocktail utopia. This is obviously close to some of Ballards stuff and perhaps 76 punk's focus on suburban boredom - wanting to be where it happens.
2) In networking as a form of practice there is always a tension between personalities bringing different flavours, vs the creation of "stars". As Jim says, Project Sigma will always be associated with Trocchi, TOPY included a definite cult of personality around Genesis P-Orridge, despite some trying to escape it... K-Punk's "kollective" will always be associated with Mark and his personal obsessions/themes.
On the other hand you have situations like early techno or whatever where the personalities really weren't the issue (and also arguably in some forms of Neoism) but at some point in the evolution of the network personalities emerged when they were needed (by the music press, by major labels looking to market artist albums rather than compilations etc).
The difficulty seems to be that market forces require marketable individuals - "they myth of the great man" - genius rather than scenius.
There have been conscious attempts to resist this, in multiple name projects like Luther Blissett and Karen Eliot, but these also often become associated with certain individuals also (Stewart Home). You also have underground dance scenes (like the C8 breakcore stuff) where producers often shy away from any kind of interviews/photos/merchandising other than their own 12" releases. In some ways this approach tends towards becoming a bit hermetic though. (Because yadda yadda you can't have anything completely untainted/autonomous under capitalism innit).
I suppose what I am saying is that networking as a tactic uses a certain level of fluid interactivity and anonymity to contest the dominant order. But if a network reaches a certain size, there is a degree of inevitability of it being subverted by this anonymity being negated.
One issue with this is that it's quite easy to do amazing work that nobody other than a close knit community of people (inevitably the ones who are clued up already) has every heard of. Another issue is that there are real problems with trying to bring that work to a larger audience...
No doubt I'll come back and disagree with myself later...