When asked directly, they will give in even if they don't like doing what is being asked.
'Asking' in these cases is actually exploitation (if done with prior knowledge).
Meanwhile you may have just asked me on a long shot.
If the other person is also an asker, it's probably accurate. As an asker myself, I have no trouble saying no when the answer is no. I will generally offer some explanation of the no, and I'll probably also suggest some other way the other person can accomplish what they were asking me about, but saying no just feels like "being honest" to me.
I'm also comfortable with the prospect that I might disappoint people this way. I consider my own disappointment to be my responsibility, and thus also consider other people's disappointment to be theirs, not mine.
Simple example, when somebody cuts into a line in a super market, how many people actually speak up? Most of the time I see eye-rolls, angry shrugs but people just move on.
Is checking out one person later going to be better or worse than what will probably be the very mild confrontation of prompting someone to move back in line? Usually, one person's inconvenient action has no meaningful impact on me at all and is quickly forgotten, but I don't know how it might impact the other person, so I wouldn't normally choose that confrontation even though it also wouldn't bother me if it happened. I'm weighing "no impact on either of us" with "no impact on me, but possible negative impact on the other."