Yes, and no.

Yes, we did rotate GM's, but in several ways.

First: Whoever felt like doing a campaign, did a campaign. Lasted ~1 year each. Worked fine, no inconsistencies, but DM burnout did happen, luckily you could just not opt to run a campaign to recover.

Second: I ran a megadungeon (Egyptian themed pyramid). I did the intro few sessions and called dibs on the last two floors, but there were 15 floors in between. Players could claim one and run it as they saw fit as long as they contained it to that level. This set-up worked amazing. Fun was had, I had plenty of sessions to just play, while the story as a whole remained intact. I can highly recommend this setup.

Third: We decided to create a joint world, where each player had a region and could make up as they would (under very general guidelines, such as "has dwarves"). We then took turns running mini-campaigns (4-6 sessions) in that world with the same characters. This was ok, but inconsistency was greater. For example, we agreed to be low magic, but at level 4 they met a salamander who gave one of the characters what amounts to a lightsaber (we were playing medieval fantasy). She was still underpowered, but come on. We had also instituted 'DM says = law' so we couldn't retcon it. Disgruntled, but we moved on. After multiple mini campaigns this world was kind of sided out.

Fourth: We did a joint DM plan. Me and my buddy were the DM's together. We would take turns leading sessions, with minor roles in roleplaying or combat tactics for the other DM. Worked great, because you could lean on the other DM and riff off of each other. Created great roleplay, but the co-DM for each session did feel a little less useful. Also less stress on one single DM because you can roll with what the other prepped.

We're currently taking a break, but I'm getting back in the DM saddle soon.