won with a king and a knight

@amazingname The point is that you took too much time to achieve your otherwise winning position. You're playing with a clock and you used up all your time in a position in which it's still possible to lose. Why wouldn't the proper result be that you lost?

Always remember: the remaining minor piece is constantly whispering: „Catch me if you can!“

@Paradise_Pete Read the thread before making a comment.

Not that i need to further make my point, since nobody can disagree with what I've already said, but consider this:

We aren't allowed to lose games intentionally.

So if, by some miracle, one of these helpmates actually occurred, it could only occur by the losing player breaking lichess rules.

Consequently, lichess is awarding the win because they are assuming the losing player will cheat to allow himself to be mated.

Is this fair? Is this justice? Or is it just what appears to be -- insanity!!!

It is usual in any sports/game that if an opponent resigns/loses/forfeits the opponent gets the maximum points what is technically possible. The worst possible play ever is the measure.
Or rolling a dice. If you conduct the experiment ad infinitum there will be mates. And so the result is and will ever be 0-1. Everything else is unfair towards the opponent.

Case closed. Full stop.

When you run out of time, you forfeit the right to make further moves - you must allow your opponent to move your pieces however he wants (within the rules of chess). And he wants to mate you.

Play with increment if you don't like that.

"Lichess rule makers" lmfao they arent making the rules, these are just the rules of chess that pretty much every single chess federation agrees on. If you play without increment these are simply the realities you must accept. Just because you can do it with helpmate doesn't mean that you need the helpmate. There are scenarios where one side has a FORCING (read: not helpmate) way of winning with only a knight

#20 Dude, Ree3 forces mate next move, and a pretty easy one at that (Qd3#). Even if somehow you managed to promote the pawn you'd still be hideously lost in that position.

Really?

@amazingname You're looking at it backwards. If a player runs out of time he loses. There's one exception to that rule - if it is a position in which it is impossible for the opponent to win. This is not one of those, so he loses. Simple.