People relate the two as similar, the token being 'of no worth' in a deliberate manner and then the idea that negligence on the site would also be deliberate.  Either as an exit scam or just a kind of abandonment of a formerly working site. 

I can see how people link all those together though Im not saying I know any of them to be true on a personal level.   I would argue the link is not direct, a token price wont do well if demand falters, doubts exist on the site overall.    If they fix all usage problems, it would most likely help their token prospect etc.

It does sound like they need 10x the support response and work to resolve issues but also its obviously a faucet not a premium site.