It kind of bothers me how cynical most of this thread is. Like, of course there is a chance that OP is creepy, that neither girl likes him at all. But is it the most likely chance? Does the weight of evidence outweigh all other hypotheses? Of course not, we don't have nearly enough information. The only things we have to go off are a handful of paragraphs from the OP himself. No objective testimony and limited information. In such a situation it is always wisest to adopt a cautious stance towards possible outcomes - just think about how many threads posters rush in to denounce information in an OP, only to look like fools within a short period of time when more information is revealed.
What do we know:
- Op has an interest in two girls.
-Both are employees at a pizza restaurant with 3 other girls which the OP also knows
-Girl C is apparently friendly whilst B seems withdrawn
-OP implicitly states a desire for a long term relationship
-OP drunkenly asked out girl C and received no response
-The girls are not waitresses, they work in the kitchen. Thus one can presume they do not have a motive to act friendly for tips
-OP talks with them regularly and has purchased them coffee and food before
And from these 7 pieces of information people are rushing to make big judgements on the OP's character. Is there anything in there so vitally important as to instantly swing all probabilities to one outcome? The only really relevant piece of information is the napkin date, from which one might conclude that the OP has misjudged the situation. But again, one should consider there are a host of possible hypotheses to explain the response received. So why rush in?