Playing on in lost positions in daily games

Daily games are different than live games, partly based on how ratings work. I think your rating adjustment is based on the ratings of the two players at the time the game ends, not the ratings at the start of the game. If you think your opponent will have a higher rating in the future, your rating may benefit a little by extending a lost game. This is especially true if your rating is provisional. In some cases your rating benefits from finishing sooner. Chess.com also has the following rules.

Sportsmanship Policy: Do not make your opponents wait unnecessarily.

Fair Play Policy: Do not artificially manipulate ratings.

Look here, after 19 moves in a clearly lost position. Against a superior rated opponent. 

I have very little counter play, aside from hoping he had completely neglected to spot any kind of defence. 

I hung my Knight hoping he would be pretty much premoving his victory. 

Somehow I was right, he ignored the Knight and a mate in 1 turned into a win for me. 

I could have resigned, but where is the fight, where is the competitive spirit in that. 

How many chess.com games are 'serious' though?  Players make mistakes, even in Daily Chess.  Personally I resign pretty quickly in a lot of games, but if my opponent doesn't I just keep playing moves, taking the 2s it takes every 3 days or whatever it is.

For those who care about such things, there are ratings reasons to not resign too, if your opponent is lower rated and may gain rating points in the time before you resign so you'll lose fewer.  I can't be bothered caring about such considerations myself, but some do.

The key there is unnecessarily. Playing legal moves is not unnecessary. 

The OP is literally complaining that he has secured a likely victory in a game of chess. 

I'm seriously baffled here. 

"Good game" is fine if it was a good game.  If it's something someone says every game then it's just words without meaning.  Not rude though, certainly, just disingenuous.

they like it da hard way 

they want it hard and to last long

u have to give it to them

some want it the easy way, they will lose in 10 moves.

but some want it the hard way

the choice is theirs, u just have to give it to them either way

That doesn't really apply in this situation. My other ratings are much higher than his and my daily rating is provisional.

You shouldn't resign in positions where there is still hope. What I'm talking about is 3 pawns + a bishop against a lone king. The best you could hope for is stalemate, and that isn't going to happen in a daily game.

So your Daily Rating is more likely to go up than down => the later he resigns the fewer rating points he loses.

Chess.com computes your average time per move for all daily games. Playing out a lost position and moving fast will give you a faster time per move. Playing unnecessarily slow will give you a slower time per move. Your daily chess move speed is shown on your profile. When you send a daily chess challenge to someone, your time per move is listed on the challenge. Some daily tournaments require an average time per move below a certain number. You tend to benefit from having a faster daily time per move, and this is how chess.com punishes slow movers.

Do you give up battle in a fight or in a war just because defeat is inevitable? If chess consists in the logic of war or a fight, then you must at least humor your opponent’s will to fight to the inevitable end, and conclude the issue as quickly as possible. It is just those who become emotional and outraged that might blunder on account of their indignation at the audacity of the defeated opponent. The new task is winning the won game as ruthlessly and quickly as possible. Do it. The task of the defeated fighter is to make that win as painful and annoying as possible for you in hopes that you become emotional and tortured - and that is the logic of the combat. Games have been won by defeated opponents simply because they were obstinate while the other guy went to sleep.