Design – Affordability in human-human interaction

No, because Gibson clearly defines the theory as an interaction between ANIMALS (not even users or people!) And their environment.

From the ecological approach to visual perception

What the environment offers is what it offers the animal, what
Provides or supplies, for better or for worse. The verb pay
is in the dictionary, the capacity of the noun is not. I have done
above. I mean with this something that refers to both the environment and the
Animal in a way that no existing term does. It implies the
The complementarity of animals and the environment.

This is very long to explain why Gibson develops this concept through several books and documents, but simply: you can not take advantage of a person, because you do not know what that person is or represents (however, the context that the person can create transmit payments, in this case, you could say that your question is feasible)

All this said, what you mention is closer to the theory of social adaptation of Pamela Homer and Lynn Kahle