I've been trying not to do this but I just can't resist. Here are my opinions on the 4 points mentioned.

1 Yes if you want to play this game very competitively, checking every hour might be the difference between a win and a lose. But if this is an issue for someone, the simplest solution is to just play less competitively or take a break.

2 I have two points on this one. First off, this is a game about diplomacy, I think politics is supposed to be expected. And secondly, "it encouraged me to be manipulative to win". I think that's supposed to happen. You can't win by being completely honest with everyone, because everyone is trying to get the same thing, first place. An important part of this game, and all diplomacy games, is convincing people that helping you helps them, even when it doesn't.

3 The games trailer clearly depicts betrayal, and I feel that it's marketed as a selling point for the game. In my opinion, the ever present threat of betrayal makes the game more exciting. If you don't like the idea of betrayal, then a game with preset teams is likely better for you than subterfuge(or they could implement preset teams). Again, the only real objective in Subterfuge is to win, and if a betrayal is going to give someone first place, I'd say about half of people would do it without hesitation.

4 I don't actually understand what this is supposed to mean. Aren't most games like this? In Monopoly you try to take your friends property and bankrupt them.

That being said, good luck out there.

Can I just say, I'm laughing so hard right now. Ucross, you come onto the forums telling everyone how to play, claiming that it's justified because of your rating, and generally have a snide attitude towards everyone. Then you rage quit because you got attacked for being fed specialists from a friend? Or, even if that's not true, you rage quit because you got attacked while winning?
I mean, you've played the game, right? I can hardly imagine that this is the first time you've been stabbed in the back. I can hardly imagine that you'd have led the leaderboards without being manipulative and stabbing people in the back on occasion, even if you generally play an honest game.
You want my opinion? I think you played in a low level game, got your butt kicked, and it was too much for your ego to handle.

I don't know ucross at all but I'm familiar with games that have forums associated with them, and rage quit threads are common.

To address TW comment, this is not just a game of skill. It is a game of DIPLOMACY. There is a skill set, yes, but it still won't get you really far without the diplomacy. I've never played a game quite like this before, and it's really fascinating.

I do think that a player can do very well by being generally honest and friendly. (Notice the qualifier "generally"). They won't get first place every time but they will consistently get 1-3rd place. Ratings will consistently improve higher and higher with this method. This is my current method and it's working really well for me.

Even in anonymous mode a "meta" is established where certain players become more/less trustworthy than others.