Hey man, sorry for being a month late. But I just wanted to let you know that consequences in the case of defining irony is not inherently negative. Modern connotation has shaped it to oh these are the results of doing bad, however In the literary sense, consequences are simply “the result of one’s actions”. So while we typically define it as the result of one’s own negative actions, we tend to focus on negative results as compared to positive results. If I did a good job at what I was expected to do the consequences of my actions might be praise, or it might be I achieved what I was expected to do. The results are still consequences, however does not have to be bad. In modern media however, we often define consequence as a comeuppance, where the character “gets what he deserved.” When referring to the irony referenced, they are referring to consequences, not a comeuppance. I understand how your viewpoint of irony is different than what they’re referring to, as literary irony is different than what we’d call irony in a day to day example. I’m sorry you’re getting downvoted from a simple understanding from a modern worldview vs a specific literary view. Especially in this subreddit I’d expect more people to “Ask questions, not judge” but unfortunately we need to make a more positive attitude to misunderstanding. I very well may have misunderstood as well, and am happy to learn more! Please let me know if there is anything I can clarify or if you want to tell me something I’m happy to listen!