No, there is a huge difference.
But why does the line lay at donuts? Who decides which rules matter? How about cash instead of donuts? How about fake references? Is that brilliant or wrong?
There are quite a few successful people who are far more than just naughty, I believe one is successful enough to be running for president. The slightly naughty have far less room to criticize outrageous behavior if their line is ever shifting and coincidentally always just beyond their own acts.
Any human system requires good intent and fair play to function. Any such system can be gamed by a small number of players. Those players will usually come out ahead with little harm to that system. If the number gets large then then any system will begin to break down. So is the goal to keep the number of rule breakers small and make sure we are always in that group?
And if the hiring process is broken, fix it. Encouraging ludicrous ad hoc random non-sense is the exact opposite of fixing anything.
What is being suggested is that there are some unwritten ever changing rules know only to the initiated that are the real rules. The official published rules are for "the other" and frankly only exist exactly to keep out the uninitiated.