Sometimes, enough should be enough.

In high school, I thought that the more black eyeliner I caked to my eye lids and the more deep burgundy, almost black lipstick I slathered on my lips, the "hotter" I looked. Boy, was I wrong. The Morticia look was so 70's--I wish someone would have sent me that memo. I literally looked like a Goth child lost in a haunted cemetery on a cold night. Of course, as my one friend likes to say, "You couldn't tell me 'nothin." I thought I was better than sliced bread. It wasn't until I saw a photo of myself at the end of my freshman year that I got scared into reality. I still have a love affair with the black eyeliner, but at least now I tend to appreciate that sometimes, a little goes a long way.

The same philosophy tends to be true with a lot of things. Take chocolate bars, for example. A few pieces of a yummy Valrhona bar is heavenly. If you somehow manage to put away the whole thing, you'll be sick to your stomach; not to mention probably 5 pounds heavier post choco-binge.  Or, the omnipotent martini. What's the saying: one martini is all right,  two are too many and three are not enough? I often tell myself, stop while you're ahead because right around the 2.5 martini mark, things get really hazy. Again, enough is enough, right?

This mantra is cycling through my brain since the morning when I heard that a court ruled against Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, the twins who claim that Mark Zuckerberg somehow stole their idea for Facebook. The court held that the greedy little twerps were not permitted to rescind their settlement with the social network reached back in 2008 and had to adhere to their original $65 million deal. At this point, the Winklevoss' are just absurd. Legally speaking, once a settlement's been reached, unless it's been shown that there was some fraud or duress or other material factor influencing one's decision to settle a matter or enter into a agreement, it will stand. Financially and purely capitalistically speaking, are they nuts? How could one not be happy with a partial ownership of the company, ownership that amount to $65 million? 

According to the twins, they alleged, unsuccessfully, that they didn't know the "true" value of the Facebook stock and, had they known, they would have settled for much more than they did. This argument was deemed meritless and I wish they'd just let it go without wasting away money on pointless legal fees. The average Harvard grad doesn't even come close to making a couple million in their entire lifetime, let alone $65 million altogether--so it's fair to say that they have a cushiony nest egg and some play money. Further, from what I know of their story, all the Winklevoss twins did was plant but a kernel of thought about a social network into Mark's head and it was he, the somewhat troubled, awkward genius, who developed it at lightning speed and with such acumen that it catapulted him to the very forefront of the social media revolution.

Isn't enough enough for the twins? As Chief Judge Alex Kozinski wrote in his opinion, "At some point, litigation must come to an end. That point has been reached." Gee, welcome to my life. No truer words were ever spoken. At $65million dollars total, settler's remorse or not, there is nothing more for the twins to fight over. Just move on and perhaps get a real job because litigation isn't clearly your strong suit. No pun intended!