I think it could be useful to remember, just for a moment, what Raksi is and why there's an NPC named Raksi in the books.
Raksi is a shapeshifting cannibal whose Tell is that her hands are backwards. Remind you of anything? She's is The Rakshasa, the Hindu shapeshifting cannibal trickster-demon who can assume any form, but who can always be recognized because its hands are backwards, which is why it compulsively hides them behind its back when interacting with people. You may recognize them from D&D, where they all have tiger-heads, but in actual Hindu mythology they're not tied to that form at all.
Note that Raksi was named Raksi, and very clearly fulfilled the archetype of The Rakshasa, about two years before the Fair Folk got renamed the raksha.
This places certain boundary conditions on what anyone can or should want to do with Raksi. For example, she needs to stay a cannibal. She also needs to keep her backwards-hands Tell, which is tricky inasmuch as the Tell is supposed to be an animal feature, but really the problem there is the idea that the Tell needs to be an animal feature, since Raksi's Tell is drawn directly from the mythology surrounding her archetype.
So the question is not so much "Should Raksi remain a cannibal in 3e?" The answer to that one is "What are you, dense? What would be the point of even keeping her at all if we got rid of the cannibalism?" The question is "How can we keep Raksi herself, i.e. in fullfillment of her own archetype, while making her a deep, interesting, and useful enough character to not be a fucking waste of wordcount?"