I'm none too happy about this FA policy.
"Pokémon or Digimon [adult characters] who have childlike body proportions" is very subjective. Even among my friend group, that opinion is different from person to person. That makes me wonder how this is going to be enforced in any reasonable manner. And we've already seen that it is being enforced in an unreasonable manner. Already have multiple very different responses from FA mods about what counts and what does not count. Cool way to run your website, staff.

The rules are extremely vague. That has to be on purpose because no policy-creator would create a rule so vague in sound mind. I would challenge you to question what motive they have for doing so. This is a vague policy of which the only true guidelines to follow are the whims of the ones who enforce it. That's not a content policy, that's chaos.

That would be bad enough on its own, but we've seen already how far the mods are overreaching. It's not uncommon for Yoshi fanart, Pikachu fanart, you name it, to be judged as "childlike in appearance" even when they're clearly not. Staff claims that "cute adults, Pokemon/Digimon or not, will not be removed unless they proportionally/anatomically represent a child," but I've been seeing leagues of art getting flagged that don't even look like teens, much less children.

Update: If what Fender wrote in the May 22 journal was actually true, then Argon Vile's Pikachu and Yoshis and Koopas wouldn't have been flagged. They do not meet the childlike proportions which were listed.

Update 2: This staff feedback appears to confirm through example that non-Pokemon canon adults will be taken down if there is any sort of size difference. Because literally what else other than the size diff is there in those examples that would violate current policy.

Who is this protecting? You're delusional if you think removing smut of a cat creature from a video game is doing anything to prevent minor exploitation. Is it because of some other reason? Then maybe you should be transparent about it.

It's obnoxious that you can't have cute and sexual in the same image. It's unjust that a lot of "cute" art gets hit with that broad "underage" brush. The general perception of media all over seems to be moving to "what the viewer personally sees" over what the creator drew and it's scary.

The fact that the administration would think that any of my sonas count as childlike is a disgusting insult. Don't forget that. They are directly calling your characters that you created "childlike" and banning them on those false grounds. I don't know about you, but I do not accept being lumped into that group because I think it's nice when an anatomically-accurate Helioptile is drawn as a cute lil fella and wants sex.

There's so many more thoughts I want to share here, but I would simply be repeating what Jaki's journal said. Read Jaki's words about the matter. They are wise and important for more reasons than just getting artwork removed.

Someone I know was of the opinion:
"Honestly the best bet is doing absolutely nothing and letting [FA staff] meticulously search through their gallery with the absolute complete fucking garbage search options and delete the shit themselves. If they want their site to be shittier, you might as well force them to do all the legwork for it. Bonus points for untagging the mons in question so they can't just search for them."