My comment on this question:
Given that the answer is not in the tar man page, why is it relevant whether <asker> consulted it? Please don't import the “RTFM” or the “if you don't know the answer, you haven't done enough research” culture that you may have found on other sites.
"Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question?" Given the facts that, as stated in both answers, the man page provides hints about appending to compressed archives, and tar would throw an error if you try, I regard both "no research" and "no attempt" as valid. The basic problem could've been solved by somebody clever enough to use a command line in general with a bit of autonomous trial&error, which I encourage the asker to apply next time. Merely <answerer>'s insightful hint provides something worthwhile here.
this site exists to help people, not to abuse them for failing to know stuff. not everyone is instantly capable of magically extrapolating every possible use-case from a cryptic hint in a man page.
Teaching how to fish is usually considered a kind of help.
I could have downvoted the question and just left, or simply ignored it in the first place. Instead I provided hints about what I think was lacking, without any prospect of gaining reputation out of it. As a result I'm bashed as if being destructive in some way.
I think there's really something wrong with the reactions, accusing me of things I didn't say or hint. Especially I consider the second reaction being abusive on its own, trying to impose its point of view on me with a sledge hammer. And I suspect these are just symptoms of something bigger going on around here.
Is pointing out the shortcomings of a mediocre question seriously considered abusive here?