Before I answer, let me just say that's quite a demeaning response, it makes you come off somewhat insufferable, and it isn't the first time. There's more diplomatic ways to say I'm using it wrong, or less rude in any case.
That being said, the way I understand it is that the simplest answer is usually the best. And how I'm trying to apply it in this dumb Quinn = Priscilla theory, is in an attempt to try and see why people even come to that conclusion in the first place. Priscilla is mentioned that one and only time, after Stephen has a conversation with Maya regarding the free tuition. Quinn is deeply involved with the free tuition scheme, and is the only person who would make some sense, outside of an entirely different character (which it most likely is). We see they had some sort of conversation in Episode 10, and Quinn later states that she is thinking about dropping out, presumably because the entire thing is being shut down. So, is Priscilla just Quinn's name or a different person? I don't care, but I can see why some might think it's the former, and how a second person seems messy.
You are applying it correctly and I love you. I'm sorry I'm rude about it, but I've had some experiences with people really digging in their heels and using "simplicity" as an argument.
The key point in understand Occam's Razor is what is meant by "simple". People mistake simple phrasing for simple claims. "Everything in this book is true" is a very simple phrase but as a claim can entail a massive amount of assertions depending on the book.
The question is: does Quinn being Priscilla actually make things simpler?
We know that the free tuition rumour is a way to bring in recruits for the restaurant and we know that it is partly true. Stephen arranges scholarships for the restaurant girls. It's "free" in the sense that they pay with sex instead of money.
Stephen chews Quinn out because she got cocky and a potential whistle blower like Maya got involved.
If the phone call was to Quinn and DPC wanted keep her name out of it the simplest way to do that was to not mention a name at all. "It's Stephen. We need to talk." would have covered it.
We know the scholarship scheme involves older customers because that's why Mona got cold feet. It's practically certain that Stephen isn't running it solo. Someone else brings in the customers while he manages the girls. So Priscilla being someone else involved doesn't really complicate matters at all, especially if she is the actual mastermind, who would have to be introduced to the plot anyway.
Madame Rose being part of the scheme would justify the character's existence, but she doesn't have to be Priscilla or the mastermind. It would just be simplest of all if she is both.
Nothing will ever justify the character's appearance, though. DPC shall never be forgiven for that one.
