So the term "id-fic" describes the motivation, not the result. Results need have nothing in common in terms of subject, approach, quality, or canonicity.
That is my understanding.
Does that make this the kind of term that would likely be taken as insulting...
I'd be cautious about applying the term externally. While there are likely many fic writers who could look at their own stories and agree retroactively that something they wrote is id-fic (and might even be thrilled to recognize that), I suspect many writers would take some offense at the idea that what they like in a story (and chose to write) doesn't have universal appeal.
Looking at my own body of works, I can identify two stories that are id-fic. Neither are labeled as such, but I wouldn't have a problem if someone else suggested they were.
no subject
That is my understanding.
Does that make this the kind of term that would likely be taken as insulting...
I'd be cautious about applying the term externally. While there are likely many fic writers who could look at their own stories and agree retroactively that something they wrote is id-fic (and might even be thrilled to recognize that), I suspect many writers would take some offense at the idea that what they like in a story (and chose to write) doesn't have universal appeal.
Looking at my own body of works, I can identify two stories that are id-fic. Neither are labeled as such, but I wouldn't have a problem if someone else suggested they were.