"do anything about it" doesn't have to mean violence. What the fuck? Why is that the first thing you jump to?

Isn't not giving Dave Chappelle money or time or attention the grand sum of things that you can do about his stance without violence?

Yes, that is the do anything about it that I'm talking about. The thing Chapelle calls cancel culture, and fights against. So if violence isn't allowed and neither is organizing to have a voice as loud as his, then what is allowed besides letting him have his way?

makes me not an ally

I don't choose who is or isn't an ally.
If the consensus of the trans community is supporting Chapelle, then I'll shut up about it because I'd clearly be mistaken, but that doesn't seem to be the case afaict, which aligns with my understanding of why Chapelle is problematic in general; he uses libertarianism as a carte blanche to pick on minorities. this just demonstrates how libertarianism is ironically discriminatory in practice, but it teaches bigots a language to defend themselves with.

I earnestly try to be a reasonable person and to express my views without judgment of other people. [...] typically, no matter what I say to you, your response is to exacerbate the argument rather than resolve it.

How am I supposed to interpret this, from someone who immediately accused me of supporting violence and then doubled down on that accusation?