Fairer players = worse MMRs?

[Pikel_meow]

Here's the situation:
The other team (for whatever legitimate reason) wants a remake.
For example, let's say they had a leaver and are now stuck 4v5.
Do you pass that remake vote? Be a fair and :empa:etic player?
'Free MMR' says an ally. You know he's right. What do?

Well..
A) You pass the vote, get a 'ty' from the other team, and quickly join the MM queue again.
B) You fail the vote, get a 'wtf' from the other team, and spend the next 30 minutes farming an already-won game... (exciting.... free MMR!)

Almost everybody chooses option B. And who can blame them?

I was an option A player, I don't care about how high MMR/stats/KD is, so I have no reason to unfairly take some from other players. I just want a fair, competitive game. But then I noticed...

I'm not cashing in on the 'free MMR', by choosing option A - Whereas everytime I'm stuck on the 4-player team, everybody taking option B makes me lose MMR.

I don't care how high my MMR is, I just want it to be fairly measured, so that I can play a matchmaking game with people my own skill level.

Ultimately, which is the more fair option, A or B?
This is a serious question, I can't decide.

[Typhoria]

A few "free mmr" games won't break their score, it all will even out in the end when they play verses people who are much better than them.

[Pikel_meow]

You're right, it will eventually all even out.
But over time, does the MMR gained/lost from these RM'd/non-RM'd games not add up?

You're 1700. You RM 5 games that you would otherwise gain MMR from if you choose to not RM, this is now +25 MMR you have missed out on.
You then have 5 games not RM'd for you, making you -25 MMR from games that are unfair.

If you're option A - You are now 1675
If you're option B - You are now 1700