Finkel -
What does it matter how you lost? You lost. Plain and simple. It does not matter if you lose a championship game by one run, goal, or point, or by 10 runs, goals, or points, or by 50. The fact is, you lost. There is victory and there is defeat. Yes, one could argue it was a "better" game to have lost closely, but that is subjective. The only objective measure is that a loss is a loss. Making one loss "worth" more is subjective and a bastardization of the game which clearly lays out Solo-Draw-Lose in the rules.
JECE -
Just because something is not written in the rules does not make it acceptable in the game. The rules state nothing about metagaming or cheating (in fact, there's old stories of how people tried to manipulate others in postal Dip games back in the day that would surely be out of bounds now) but we have collectively decided it's unacceptable.
My argument is that we should interpret the rules in the very obvious (to me) way they are written. There is a winner (solo), shared survivors (draw - and I wouldnt' call a draw a "victory" either, just merely living to continue the fight later), and losers (people who have been eliminated, or allowed a victor to emerge in a solo).
As GOD stated, the fact that you gain points when losing (allowing a solo) is absurd. Especially when you can HELP that person solo to gain points. How is that not a bastardization of the intent of the game? The rules clearly indicate you should try to win, and if that fails, ensure you draw. Nowhere in any rules is there any indication that trying to help someone win, or just being on the other side of the map from a solo, is a positive outcome that should net you praise (or points) in any way.