Uhh, your ignorance is showing. "IDIC" may be fictional, but the idea behind it is not.
It's not about what is or isn't fictional. The problem is that I often see Trek fans treat it as if it's this law or ideal that Trek created and that it's some epitome of wisdom that should be followed just because it's espoused by the show, when in actuality the show has very little to say about it. It was just something tacked on as a merchandising tactic, not some grand idea that embodies what Star Trek is.
Instead, fans twist it to suit their own specific cases to make it say things like, "Everybody should appreciate that there are going to be different incarnations of Star Trek." If that's what fans are twisting IDIC to mean, that's bullshit. People are free to love Star Trek, hate it, or a mixture of both, and just because some half-baked toy marketing scheme says one thing, fans aren't beholden to that philosophy like it's some sort of dogma.
Go and look at the post I quoted and the usage of IDIC. "Practice IDIC." Practice? Really? I think you might want to reconsider before you start throwing terms around like idiotic or ignorant.