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