One of the snarky comments on Edward Feser's blog put words to my general feeling about him:

There was never any pretense that it was about "nothingness" in the sense Feser would like it have been. So why does he pretend that it was? He's on a divine mission to uncover straw men.

(Naturally the locals call this commenter an atheist troll and ask him to "do the reading" -- no doubt "read the Sequences" in the local dialect -- but he retorts, "It makes no difference to you whether I do the reading or not. You complain either way.")

EDIT: If you haven't read Feser before, his standard blog-writing process is:

1. Take some atheist claim.
2. Reduce it to Aristotlelian jargon. (optionally admitting that this changes the meaning of the original claim entirely)
3. Show that some medieval philosopher said the jargon claim was nonsense.
4. Accuse the original atheist of spewing nonsense and being unaware of the true philosophical underpinnings of Christianity.