Analysis please

Well, starting from the back, it was not necessary for White to resign. After Kf5, QxQ, a7! White is probably winning.

I know, he resigned because he saw he was going to loose his queen. But I guess what I'm really asking if I was wrong to continue to play and be called a "looser" instead of resigning I played for a draw.

2...  g6

When an opponent has a reckless queen I usually don't try to chase her with pawns. You can't reverse a move made by a pawn,  once you have moved it you're stuck with the advantages and the disadvantages of that move for the rest of the game.  While the motivation for harrassing the Queen was good one, maybe one of these moves could have better.

2... Nc6,  or  2... d6 (protecting the e5 pawn, while developing or opening the way to develop your pieces) 

If the queen stays put after your move you can then harass her while developing another piece by 3... Nf6. Now the pressure is on and your minor pieces can chase her while seeking powerful positions to snipe your opponents mostly undeveloped front.

This may be a good start but I'm sure there are more alternatives.

no i don't think so.. you have every right to continue.. there's no chess rule which says you have to resign in such a position.. but i have to say, he was foolish to resign.. he had a won game..