I don't see a lot of "nay-saying" 'round here. What I see is "X is robust, reliable, field-tested, and optimal for touring and/or works for me" and, in the opposite corner, the "anything goes" cheerleading.

Both have their virtues; but what can I say, except that I'm a bit partial to the former. When I tour, I don't want to waste my time dealing with mechanicals if it can be helped; I like wide tires (bye-bye, calipers); I like to have a large handlebar bag (hence no STI). A couple of tours on sub-optimal equipment have taught me that there is quite a bit of virtue in using the appropriate tool for the job.

And I can't even tell you how many times I've heard about the Superior Greatness of Our New Product. It's called "hype," and the resulting product rarely matches up to it. Especially in its first incarnation.

Now maybe the belt drive will turn out to be a good product, and perhaps even appropriate for touring. But in the interim, parts (and not just the belt) will be scarce, real-world durability is unknown, and field repairs are almost certainly more time-consuming and difficult than replacing a chain.

I'd stick to using a belt drive for commuting for a little while longer, before using it for a tour.