Tonearm mount on the plinth or on Pillar ?

Throughout this thread arguments on both sides seem to have merit. I will say Ralph's data is the most convincing given that he has measurements to support his viewpoint. It would be interesting to see some data involving the turntable  setup where the turntable functions from a different room isolated from the airborne and to some extent transmission through the structure of the playback room. 
During my college years I often listened to a system in which that was the case. In this case it was absolutely necessary or the stylus would fly off the table otherwise. We listened kinda loud! I still do.
I really enjoy these kinds of discussions, always a lot to learn here. A similar discussion about spiking vs isolation of speakers on WBF is equally intriguing. Even the propagator of Stillpoints began to question his product and we all know what a wonderful system that is.

Does this plinth-tonearm arrangement represent "closed loop" solution ?

The Resomat is indeed a contrarian design in that it specifically decouples the LP from the platter, whereas most platter mats make an attempt at coupling to facilitate the dissipation of spurious energy delivered into the vinyl by the passage of the stylus in the groove.  

This is again against the principle of "closed loop". I have the resomat too and it does bring a lot of goodies due to the "isolation" of the vinyl from the vibrating motor/platter, especially in terms of reducing noise floor and presenting a more airy sound. But music looses on the timing aspect, it doesnt sing as one, probably due to the decoupling. I have since moved to a Funkfirm Achromat which is the best compromise I have heard yet. And yes, it tightly couples the vinyl to the system.

Does this plinth-tonearm arrangement represent "closed loop" solution ?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/112016969322