Conceding

[FrankJones]

One thing I find puzzling.

If a player can "concede" at 50% completion and the opponent gets full ELo, why does ap layer only get 50% Elo is an opponent "quits" at 50%?

If two players (or player using multiple accounts) can concede at 50% while still getting full Elo to the other account, why does there need to be An Elo penalty to the winner if the player quits instead of conceding:?

[Hervor]

One thing I find puzzling.

If a player can "concede" at 50% completion and the opponent gets full ELo, why does ap layer only get 50% Elo is an opponent "quits" at 50%?

If two players (or player using multiple accounts) can concede at 50% while still getting full Elo to the other account, why does there need to be An Elo penalty to the winner if the player quits instead of conceding:?

Assuming everyone is using these features in good faith, I think the intention is that I concede if I think I lost (so my opponent actually wins and gets full ELO) and I quit when other circumstances arise (baby starts crying, etc.). In the latter case, I might be ahead by a lot and likely to win, so giving my opponent full ELO would not be fair.
Since it would be prohibitively time consuming, if even possible, to code for every game at every point the chances of one party winning or not, giving 50% ELO is a simple compromise.