I agree that Ben's appeal was not suitable when considering that his main audience is the admin team. This kind of satire would have been better in the "General Discussion" thread.
However, the initial reason for his ban seems inappropriate, regardless of his past crimes. We should be focusing on why he was banned in the first place because there has already been agreement and punishment placed on his crimes in the past (ie: "Dumbass" title).
The degree of the crime, "AFK-pushing," doesn't equal the degree of the highest form of punishment, The BanHammer, whether it was toward an admin or not.
At this moment, I think it's best to give him punishment based on his "AFK-pushing" and give a heed of warning to his satirical appeal. To find the post "insulting" or "disrespectful" is an opinion based on who's reading it. Also, his appeal wouldn't have been made it there hadn't been an irrational decision to ban him in the first place.
After the warning, however, Ben should not be excused from "disrespecting" the admin team in this similar manner.
And according to the Rules:
These are Admin Rules, to avoid abuse of power. Applied to Moderators as well.
[1] Bans require agreement. If no other Admin is online, the ban may be enacted, but must be reported to the other Admins, or the ban thread in our forum. If it is not agreed upon, then the ban will be lifted, and announced in the Forum Thread. This includes lifting a ban that has been appealed in a forum.
And again, focusing on the
INITIAL reason of the ban (AFK-pushing), any possible objection to it should mean that the ban should be lifted.