No, I leave my brightness at 100% on my monitor, because PWM. 🙂 But it's fine, because it's probably 13 years old already, so the ccfls will have dimmed a little by now and back then they didn't have superbright tubes anyway.
I'm old enough that I still have a green phosphor monitor in the basement. 🙂
Yes, the pattern was different. With CRTs it was a single narrow line moving from the top down. I imagine at higher refresh rates like 75 to 100 Hz (I liked 100) the line wouldn't remain in the same spot as long so perception would have been affected, but in terms of power illuminance, I doubt there would have been any difference. No backlight at all, just a line. So that's probably part of why some people like OLED displays, they don't have backlights either. With LCD you have the crystals moving into different orientations in front of the backlight which can also be doing its own thing. Fluorescent manufacturers were originally at 60 Hz but then later moved to electronic ballasts which allowed them to do 20 kHz which was a big difference. I replaced some magnetic ballasts with electronic ballasts in the basement myself and I could see a noticeable difference. The electronic ballasts were hugely better. Lots of factors at play with this issue.
All I am saying here is that I don't think flicker is the be-all end-all. I mean, I am fine with my OLED phone even with flicker. I just have it at a comfortable brightness and colour temperature.
Temporal dithering, I agree is more problematic and my monitor does have that built into the panel since it's a TN.
I think the best thing to look for is probably less-spiky spectrographs. Like, don't have a giant blue peak and very low green or red or whatever. Everything else has to fight harder to compensate. It would be better if there were more than just 3 peaks, and the height of each was reasonably close to each other.