Playing on after surrendering...

Shit happens, someone is getting riled up and toxic as hell, and they go on tilt - refuse to participate / afk in well.

Your team collaterally decides that the game is over, yet people are refusing to surrender because they want to intentionally irritate a player who wants the game to end.

In any competitive gaming scene, honestly if any INDIVIDUAL forfeits a match the team loses, yet if an ENTIRE TEAM does it, it creates a special environment, in which you can condone normally poor sportsmanlike behavior, such as intentionally feeding. Honestly, the way it's perceived is your actions no longer have any impact on the outcome of the match. After all, everyone has agreed they are no longer interested in winning the match. Everyone has decided there is no coming back.

My question is, should this be standard? Granted two wrongs don't make a right, but if your only real alternative is side-stepping in the fountain to avoid LeaverBuster protection, is it really an offense? Certainly this might be a one-off scenario for you, but...yeah let's just say I've 'seen it before.'

Now you might ask, what benefit is there in somebody doing this? Well I see it like this. Your team isn't going to surrender, neither are they going to participate, you might as well feed the opponents so that the game ends sooner.