Assuming I'm reading this right:
D U O V F - Bdale Garbee
D U O V F - Russ Allbery
D U O V F - Don Armstrong
D U O V F - Keith Packard (Intel)
U D O F V - Colin Watson
U F D O V - Andreas Barth
F U D O V - Steve Langasek (Canonical)
F V O U D - Ian Jackson
V sysvinit (no change)
F requires further discussion
So assuming left-to-right priority, 2 votes were for "further discussion." So it was more or less a 4-2 vote with 2 abstentions. Langasek's second choice was upstart, and Jackson's second choice was sysvinit. If they both went to the upstart side--which sounds like a quite reasonable outcome to me--we'd be looking at a 4-4 tie. If a tie-breaker is necessary to break deadlock, there is NO WAY you can call it "overwhelming."
Like I said before, 50%+1 (which this vote wasn't, even) is not my definition of "overwhelming." I dare say that most people would call that a majority (more votes than all other choices combined). This is merely a plurality, among a particularly small sample size at that.
Ich kann mit Übersetzungsschwierigkeiten sympathisieren.