:::It shouldn't be mentioned because it's synth, because it's not any more relevant than his other board memberships, and because it isn't necessary in the introduction. By mentioning this I'm trying to follow the precedent set on these articles. I thought you basically agreed that introducing researchers based on their connection to the PF is a bad idea based on your comment here. 

 :::I agree with your below comment also, to include more criticism of Lynn's book. If we have a section devoted to "reception" of his book, which I suggested earlier, we could include a sampling of his many negative reviews. This could include any that mention his affiliation with the PF, as long as it's adequately cited. -