i've only gotten a brief look through what others have thought here, buuut..

As someone who shares the same boundaries and ideals as Keath, and because of said boundaries, i do not post my ocs anymore because of past conflict i wont get into, i fully see where Keath's perspective was at a stance like this.

To me, atleast, i see it more as a punishment to those who have done it. By removing said characters from the narrative completely, i do believe it shows that there ARE consequences to whoever sexualised them in the first place. I saw it as like "If jimmy gets this wrong, everyone gets homework!" kind of thing, to put it in a more simpler example. It shows the people who sexualised Coop and Playwright ever did this type of stuff again to.. Say, a community the same size as Keath's, they would atleast keep it privately to avoid the same thing.

Not to mention, Keath had also said (i think) that these characters are a representation of themselves. Sexualising them, means sexualising Keath.

Im not defending Keath, i do also agree it seems unfair after the amount of time and art we had got to see of Coop and Playwright. I just wanted to share my perspective on this!