Even more boring, I never saw it as anything more than a social engineering attack.

Yeah, its no different than greasing thr palms of s dirty cop to make a traffic stop go away.

That depends on whether the Meta employees were wise to the true nature of their relationship with this woman. Did she tell them what she wanted before she had sex with them? The article doesn't make this clear, but I suspect she didn't.

If you read what actually happened you can see that all proper internal procedures were followed. Corruption heavily implies that something that exists for other people is (temporarily) removed, or some requirement is waived as a result of compensation. That is not what happened.

If internal procedures allow Meta employees to be paid (in cash or favors of any kind) to be internal champions for repeatedly resubmitting bans to the Integrity Team roulette appeals process, “proper” is the opposite of the word I would use to describe the practice.

That’s how “friends and family” policies work, though: the company gives you perks to bestow upon your friends, so that they can trade their relationship with you for a benefit.

She used sexual favors to get an employee to unban the account that shouldn’t have been banned in the first place. I doubt those are proper procedures as defined by Meta’s guidelines.

It’s “corruption” by any credible meaning of the word. If the story is true then it’s a catastrophe for Meta.