No, that's not at all what it means. Another person who does not understand the bullshit that is NPS. NPS treats people rating at the lowest of the scale just like people rating at the middle of the scale, which is patently ridiculous.
Of course NPS scores overlook some nuances. It's a single estimate of a complicated space. The imprecision is probably to its advantage. The goal is not to be perfect (no single number could do that), but to provide a quick estimate of quality with a single question (nobody wants to fill out a 3 page survey, and the executive team is only going to sit and listen for a single statistic).
As an exercise, consider how you chose a restaurant based on a standard Yelp 1-5 scale: you might find that you are using a similar methodology while reading product/service review. Ratings of 1-3 are considered bad reviews, 4s are decent and 5s are good. American culture as a strong bias for positive affect so a 3 is considered to be unfavorable. Additionally, there is a lot of variance in terms of how people get upset and express their anger. Someone may rate something as a 1 because they are more expressive of their angry, while another person rates it as a 3, but neither is really happy with the service. Try coming up with a better metric based on yelp reviews for restaurants you are familiar with and you might find that NPS does a reasonable approximation of what you have discovered.