People shouldn't have heckled until they found out what the rank was, honestly. It could be anything from "full member" to "veteran member" to "GM only." And each deserves different feedback. As for the fairness of guild policy -- as long as the policies are in writing, discriminated members can't complain when the roll goes the way it was designed. They had their chance to complain or gquit when they heard about it. If they don't like it when it happens, they're morons for being lazy and not fighting it sooner (or, OMG, even reading it).
We debated novelty loot at length in IVV back when the phoenix was a real potential raid drop (and not just an annoying farm). Obviously, I wanted rules that favored me, but I still feel strongly about the issue and just can't see it the same way as the guild-hopping woman I argued with at the time, who said essentially "Who cares? Just let everyone roll."
Her everyone meant the brand new initiates and members who had very little real connection to IVV, and who all did eventually leave in a minor mass exodus (a situation brought on by our then-loose friend inclusion policies and the desperation for raiders, something I've never been proud to say I was accomplice in).
I'm going to cut to the brutal, sensible chase: status pieces acquired by a guild should stay in the guild.
Thus, I'm in favor of denying rights to status loot (legendaries, mounts, etc) to people who haven't proven themselves as part of their guild.
To me, the fairest way to do this in a more casual guild is length of active time as a full member, such as staying in the guild with no problems for a few months (three months is not unreasonable for a once-a-year drop). Or even (in raiding guilds) raid time clocked. Hell, dkp if you have it. I suggested picking a person to receive legendaries based on their availability and prominence in raids (hard work = reward sort of thing), and, from what I understand, IVV officers plan to decide what to do with legendaries before it's an issue (and will take into account a player's availability and usefulness to the raid).
The backbone to the way I think is that the loot shouldn't go to someone who may take it and leave. That is a slap in the face I'd rather avoid.
The problem is there's no way to know that won't happen even with older members, and indicating to newer members that you don't trust them is never a good idea.
Thus my "stay in IVV as a full member for X amount of time" proposal. It has a clear-cut designation and doesn't really favor anyone over anyone else. It's a solid test of staying power, too, if you don't make it something stupid like a week.
I'm pretty sure IVV's policy on mounts is that anyone present can roll, and that works for most, but I still think rare status items deserve to be kept close to home and need a measure more protection than "Have at it."
Ah well. Despite feeling strongly about policy, I'm glad I'm not an officer anymore. It's exhausting.
Anecdote for the road:
A guy from the guild in this controversy got the first Onyxian Drake on our server.
I looked up the drop rate for the Onyxian Drake for husband, who was disappointed that they got the first one since they had a confirmed ninja who hadn't been gkicked.
Scanning the comments, I read the following out loud, ending it with a smug high five:
Skaknight: possibly the coolest looking mount in game [. . .]
Venci: The coolest flying mount in game is Ashes of Al'ar ! Don't forget that.Take that, guild who kept a stupid ninja. Random strangers in wowhead comments say you're not the cutest! *raspberry*