Could cloudflare legally charge them a bribe to captcha their users less? It isnt good to have a company in this position of power if so.
Why are you using Starlink at all if you have other options?
I've had several area WISP connections, as there's no wired infrastructure to my area, and they vary in quality. I work full time remote, so I need two connections as a general habit - I can work with one, but when that one is down for a week straight, I have problems. I like being able to fail over.
I typically keep one connection for "interactive" traffic, and one for "bulk transfer/failover" - things like my local Ubuntu repo mirror, offsite backup traffic, etc. And I can fail to it if needed, which I do often enough.
On a good day, Starlink is far better than my WISP connection, and I have some machines routed out it persistently. On a bad day, I can't hit much from it, because that particular public IP has been blocked from large parts of the internet. It's very hit and miss, and overall bandwidth has definitely dropped from the early days, though reliability of getting packets where they need to go is drastically improved.
I could do a range of things to solve it, but as I have two ISPs, I typically just switch to the one that works better for the solution. I'm aware it's not a technically fancy solution, but it's quick and easy (change the gateway on the machine), and works fine.
I've been noticing this too, and it's why Starlink remains my secondary ISP/bulk transfer connection. If I had to drop one connection, I'd drop Starlink for this reason alone.
There are some sites that I simply can't browse, and it's not Cloudflare errors, either. Lowes, in particular, simply returns error pages for anything but the main landing page on a regular enough basis. Of course, my observed public IP changes so it's not consistent, but it's genuinely annoying.