Thanks for your feedback.
While I do believe that Option 4 could be an interesting and viable option (which is why I suggested it, lol), it does have the potential to spark some divisiveness in the fandom (and probably among the creators too), because you'd literally be claiming that one Peter and MJ are the "real" ones and the other set we've been following for the past 15 years are "copies" or "variants". In a certain sense, it'd basically be akin to the Clone Saga where you claim that the guy who's been headlining the books for a while isn't the "real" one. And consequently, it invalidates or throws out a lot of the new mythology and characters that were introduced during that period (or at least, makes it confusing as hell to acknowledge it).
I included Option 4 because I do think Superman Reborn can serve as an inspiration for the Spider-Man franchise, and this approach is technically closest to what DC did. But it's a fact that Superman Reborn literally jettisoned the New 52 Superman and replaced him with the Post-Crisis version, declaring the latter as the "real" Superman of the "fixed" timeline (with the New 52 itself as a corruption of the DCU). A lot of fans, especially those on here, embraced it, but it did alienate quite a few newer fans who came on board with the New 52 Superman, or who generally enjoyed the more Golden Age/Silver Age-esq status quo of a younger, single Superman. But with DC, this is kinda par for the course - you have multiple conflicting versions of characters and TPTB need to pick one to be the 'main' version.
Marvel's approach to continuity is totally different. Even when it comes to OMD/BND, their argument is that this is the one, true Peter and MJ whose lives Mephisto tampered with. So while on a technical level, 'splitting' Spider-Man into two would make sense, it does
kinda go against the spirit of Spider-Man being the same guy we've been following in an unbroken line since 1962. That said, its not like Marvel hasn't done weird timeline-related stuff to characters before (whatever they did to Tony Stark in the late 90's which I honestly just don't understand, for instance
)
So I dunno...this one needs a bit more thought.