All right, I guess I was a bit too oblique.

You are implicitly taking a very strong position about persuasion. Essentially, it is never okay and always about self-interest at the expense of the other person. When a person says no, it's final, period, regardless of why they say no, because they always know best.

But that's very far from the reality experienced by most actual people. It's like the ASD simplification of human behavior that allows one to mask as mostly-not-a-creep.

If someone is tired in the morning but you know they almost always feel better after having breakfast at a local cafe, reminding them about the delicious scones there is "persuasion". You should back off! They said, "I'm tired, I don't feel like it," and that should be the end of the story. Right? Or not right, because they actually need help motivating themselves right now to do the thing that, in the longer run, they'd be glad to have done?

Consider the case where someone values thoughtfulness and being appreciated (note--people usually do value this). Suppose two people are out at a cafe and one person didn't get their favorite pastry (because it was sold out). They finish their coffee, then one says, "I need to get going now, good luck with your plane flight next week." If the other says, "Thanks! Hey, you know, I loved this conversation--do you think we can maybe pick it up tomorrow, and I'll buy you that kouign amann?" this is persuasion but it also might be the sign of thoughtfulness and appreciation that the first person was looking for and hadn't yet spotted clearly enough. Had they known before, they would have suggested to meet tomorrow instead of saying "good luck with the plane flight next week" suggesting "I'm not interested in seeing you before then". But, what, the second person should just back off and not show any interest, any thoughtfulness, just because the first person had already indicated a (soft) stop?

Of course it can be overdone.

Of course it can be selfish.

But that doesn't mean it's always overdone or always selfish.

And that's what your reply missed. One can be considerate and not force one's will on others, but still treat interactions as a give and take, not "one suggestion of a no and you back off forever, period, end of story".

If you have no choice but to err one way or the other, the back-off-forever one is the safe choice. If you have trouble reading people, that's exactly what you should do. Otherwise it's so simplified as to be almost useless in practice. It's about as useful as, "The speed limit says 55 so you don't drive over 55, period," despite the fact that everyone is going 70 and it's actively dangerous to have everyone passing you at 15 mph. (Use 90 kph and 110 kph if you're outside the U.S..)