I will begin by admitting that the title is a bit misleading; what I am about to state actually works for all TCGs with which I am significantly familiar and unless there is something radically different about a particular game it should work for that as well. This is a discussion about how we the players* have a need to convince others that our thoughts and opinions are worth consideration; the basic need when trying to persuade another. It is different than someone feeling they can "relate" to you, at least most of the time; unless dealing with something more of an emotional state, it doesn't matter if someone knows how you "feel" on the matter. Instead this is about successful communication, as well as how to evaluate credibility, both your own and others. Some may find this harsh, even judgmental but... that's the point. For your own sake and the sake of anyone who trusts you, you must learn to distinguish between not only a good point and a bad point, but between good messaging and bad messaging: sometimes a bad idea will be presented in an enticing way and sometimes a very good one will be rejected because the one delivering the message butchered the point. The first component is being understandable. If people can't comprehend what you are saying, how can you persuade them? This includes basics like grammar, spelling, message length but also includes proper argumentation. Just the presentation of your message matters, as if you don't care enough to make something "look good", it can lead others to question whether you value your own message. Second is when we get to experience, something that includes both general knowledge of the game as well as accomplishments within the game. Having an awesome first year in competitive play? While that is great it also isn't as compelling as someone who has done it multiple times, including in vastly different formats. Likewise older accomplishments are not the same as current ones; both have value but should not be mistaken as interchangeable. Knowing the history of the game helps for a variety of reasons; the game reuses a lot mechanically, even apart from reprints and it can help you with evaluating how relevant a player's particular accomplishments are to the discussion at hand. If you haven't encountered both long time players that don't know what they are talking about and "up and comers" that have a hot season before burning out and also didn't know what they were talking about, just keep paying attention because I've seen this in Pokémon as well as other games. If you lack any of these, it will be difficult to establish credibility, but still quite possible; you simply need to acknowledge what you lack and make sure your arguments rest upon reason and not just personal experience as well as making sure you can easily be understood. I have seen skilled players "lose" arguments because they just couldn't explain why what they said should work, only maintain that it does. Sometimes they were proven correct because events unfolded as predicted, other times they had it wrong. Either way, people couldn't understand them or had someone else making a good counterargument they could follow. *As opposed to the-powers-that-be such as Pokémon R&D, TPCi, etc. trying to convince us of something.