the linked proposal is the old DMG procedures Prop #4

@sirocyl Haha Oops. fixed

ty \o

I think the "refrain to access" provision (Duties 6) should be fleshed out a bit more, in terms of information security best-practices, principles and coordinating procedures.

@sirocyl Do you (or anyone else) have any prior art I'd be able to draw from, in terms of what should be added there?

I've added an additional paragraph to the Rationale section, to make clear that Keyholders are no more important/powerful than Stewards in matters of governance.

While Keyholders are trusted with access to more of the Website League’s infrastructure, this should not elevate them beyond the status of any other Steward in governance. The purpose of the Keyholder role is to ensure smooth operation of central League services, and to minimize the attack surface of those services by granting access to as few people as possible. Keyholders are not to be viewed as “above” Stewards in any sense, and Keyholders must not abuse their elevated access to attempt to subvert, disrupt, or overrule League governance processes.

Some additional changes have been made, after discussion on Coordination (relevant thread):
- Include the Gitlab organization and Google account hosting our shared Google Drive under Access
- Clarify that only Stewards are eligible for Keyholder responsibilities
- Define a process for Keyholders to temporarily step down from their roles if necessary