I admit to being a bit of an idiot; nor am I a lawyer.
However, I find all of this to be incredibly suspicious. You know, it's the, "It'll be like this! until it isn't."
...eh.
I've invested a lot of time into 5e, but I'm sad to say that we're migrating to PF2e in the next couple months/years. I have two 5e campaigns to finish my saga, and I don't want to convert them to PF2e and run them in there because that would be bonkers tedious. Too much work for too...
I have to vote no!
However, with the right DM and the right setting and the right campaign, it might be fun. I wouldn't enjoy it, either as a player or DM.
I am super-lore heavy as a DM. I use it to feed information on my current campaigns early, and future campaigns that I want to run in the same setting. I don't try to overwhelm my players, though; I like the lore to be found organically by things that the player have done rather than just throw...
Um, I generally don't have a "go-to," except for a few prerequisites:
1. Long campaign. I hate short campaigns. Most can't really develop a character fully over the course of 3-7 session, and there's nothing to me more satisfying then going through the long campaign and getting that closure in...
I run it as-is, except that I use a (modified) lingering injuries that can crop up after a natural 20. The player (be it me the DM for a monster, or the PC's player) rolls a d20 and on an 11 or higher, there's a lingering injury.
I don't have any interest in the game system, but I'm on the last section of Curse of the Crimson Throne in my 5e conversion. Its such a good story. I hope they do Shattered Star and then Return of the Runelords next.