How ironic that one would be using Google's cached version to read this

More ironic that Google has a cached copy and CloudFlare not.

Not really ironic because nobody expects that CloudFlare Always On cached copies will actually work.

It is not ironic, it's just a coincidence.

I'm not sure why you posted this link. The comment I was responding to does not meet any of the definitions you posted.

As others have pointed out using Google cache to view a high traffic anti-Google article would be coincidental and not ironic.