And the email purported to have been written by Andy Stone (who does not seem to be Indian) is rife with indicators that it was written by an Indian English speaker:
* How the hell <report> got leaked? (non-standard conjugation)
* Why didn't anyone of you bother... ("anyone" for "any one")
* Put <names> on watchlist. (dropped article)
* Send me ... for last one month. (dropped article)
While "to link up" is an idiom in American English, "to link <someone> up" is not. The phrase is intransitive -- even if the referent were a person, one would usually say "to link up with <someone>". Moreover, the phrase implies a casual social encounter, which wouldn't be appropriate here; a more formal introduction would be implied by a phrase like "get me in touch".
Given the history of Facebook, there are high chances that the leaks are true. The tweet that you linked claimed the leaks to be fabricated based on following 3 points and imho, none of the 3 points make much sense.
>>
1. "http://instagram.workplace.com" isn't a URL that exists lmao
2. any emails sent from andy et al would be "
@meta
," not "
@fb
"
3. a source just confirmed there's no email alias called "Internal"
If a url is not available to public that does not mean that the url does not exist “Lmao”
(Of course, it is possible that Meta has done something special to make their Workspace instance behave exactly like a nonexistent one. I can't rule that out. But it would be very unusual for them to build in a confusing special case just for themselves.)