I'm Baffled

Someone could have won their game easily against me, but decided to get five queens with their pawns, then they resigned. Soooo they technically won but I did. What the heck??

You tell me, my brother had a game where his opponent had a mate-in-1, then his opponent resigned. Maybe they were extremely worried about stalemate?

Hahaha that's funny cause it would have been so easy to checkmate me... but wow, that opponent. It would be understandable if he didn't see it, but in my case it was just so obvious. Oh well.

How terrible of me. He/she, didn't mean to assume genders

Maybe they resigned because they were so disappointed that they were unable to get a 6th queen 🤔

I know some players that think it is normal politeness for an opponent to resign is a totally lost position and such players may get so upset that they first demonstrate how lost the position can get and then resign if the opponent is still too impolite to understand the proper course of action that should be taken.  Such players are actually reinforcing the behavior that they are trying to stop.

I considered the possibility of sandbagging but there would have been such a big chance that you would have resigned that I rejected that possibility.

post the game

I think they're sandbagging

I'm pretty sure it is when you purposely make your rating go down so you can easily beat low rated opponents 

Particularly when there are tournaments or sections of tournaments or class prizes that are rating capped.

That was the position, and they just resigned...

Yeah, I was going to resign way before when they promoted their first queen, but they just kept going. I thought it was pretty funny, so I hung around to see what would happen and then they resigned.

HAHAHA yeah that would have been funny

With some planning and use of the King and Rook to block diagonals they could have promoted to seven queens camped out on the first rank without delivering checkmate or stalemate.

I find it mildly interesting that Chess.com allowed a resignation against a lone King (only mildly because it is a legal option and would require TD/Arbiter intervention to treat it as an abandoned game with a draw assigned as if the player flagged.

That all being the way it is, the main question should be: why did you continue to play this game? You had nothing left and they so much. Why was it so important to you to waste their time by continuing that game, while you could both have played another one? 

In case it's not that apparent, I am one of the believers that not resigning in such completely lost positions is just a rude thing to do. What if they were on break and because of you they can't play another game? I would've mated you and blocked you immediately afterwards.

Well I wasn't trying to be rude or impolite. I thought I was going to be mated with the one queen and their rook, but they kept promoting so I hung around. Never meant to offend anybody if that's how you took it.

Some people always play out losing positions.  They may learn techniques they were unsure of.  They may simply feel that a game should be played to completion.  Their opponent may make a mistake trying for overkill and deliver a stalemate.

Quickly mating is the best option.  Blocking the opponent is a personal prerogative.  Playing for overkill and stalemating or resigning simply reinforces the third reason to play out a lost position.

Yeah, quick mate is what I expected my opponent to do. But they didn't. Anyway, it was an interesting experience, and I have learnt that some people think what I did was rude while others don't.