After some sessions of play, Marie gets a small holding and wealth.  Its population is tiny, they're eager recruiters, and they're decadent and perverse.  Surplus: 1-barter growth want: savagery.pg 261

Except starting from 1 barter anxiety base choosing tiny drops anxiety, choosing successful recruiters adds growth, choosing decadent and perverse drops -1 barter and adds savagery.  Surplus 0 barter growth want: savagery.  Am I missing the unwritten rule that makes the book example hold true?  Can barter not be dropped below one regardless of the options chosen?  I feel like this falls under a similar guideline of the Battlebabe's special weapon choices.  You could make a head-scratcher, but why would you.

Further food for thought, the scene worked great and played out well with the characters involved, however in discussing interference to possibly limit the Skinner it bears pointing out that Artful & Gracious as written targets only NPC audience members.

Well hello fellow players. 

I agree both the situation as set up and the possible outcomes resolved better with seize by force than it would have for go aggro.  Truth reading Barkers intentions established he was about to make a move to end the smart mouthery.  A partial success of go aggro makes the situation more confusing, why would Barker reconsider for anything less than a complete success?  The results for a seize by force roll allow for several of the outcomes that I think Truth was looking for.  Even with the partial success in this case Truth got results, just not all the results in the spectacular fashion a complete success would have brought to the situation.  I sure hope Barker doesn't have any hard feelings...

It is rather telling how stereotypes of one playbook can lead to the entire world being against them regardless of how they are handled by the player.  Take a generalization of a Gunlugger, one man unstoppable death machine that solves most problems through violence.  Funny we do not see them ostracized in the way of the Brainer.  I guess people are more comfortable just being murdered outright than the thought of being weirdly manipulated?

I have personally been intrigued by a "Life After People" type scenario inspired in part by the book Earth Abides.  After a few generations there is a general reset to a hunter gatherer state of nature.  It might make too many assumptions about scarcities of guns, ammo, technology and such to appeal to some groups though.

Edit: more advice for OP

First and foremost remember playing a game is supposed to be fun.  You can put a great deal of work into it for sure, but focus on the fun.  If you think this might not be the game for your group there is only one way to find out for sure.  Give them the chance to find out, players mindsets can change from session to session.  Talking about the positives and negatives of trying new games and systems can help, even after the fact since you have already gotten things started.  Play up the positives and continue to work on the negatives.

PCs being dicks to each other is not a bad thing.  It can certainly make for some interesting scenes, especially when two would be foes are forced to work together however temporarily to face a larger threat.  I have seen great things spin out of two players trying to read or resist the other reading their character.  This is why I suggested getting the players invested in their characters motivations.  Being dicks to each other might not seem like a constructive motivation, but work with it or whatever else they give you.  If they are making moves and handling their side of the conversation, that makes for more fun for you. 

Do you know who does not like politics and intrigue?  The types of people who are no good at it.  The types that see subtlety as a waste of time when you could just go for the throat and take what you want.  Maybe you know some NPC's that share this world view.  I would imagine that all the politics, secrets and whispers smells like weakness to them.  Maybe one or two of the residents of the hold see those in positions of power doing little but lording their status over more capable replacements.