Nothing in Haskell was sufficiently interesting to justify overcoming the conceptual barriers and different culture.
[1]:http://dev.stephendiehl.com/hask/#eightfold-path-to-monad-sa...
[2]:Regular expression tutorials, by contrast, virtually never attempt to explain regular languages or automata theory, which is why nobody complains about having to learn formal language theory in order to use `sed`.
A surprisingly digestible (and concrete) explaination of monads (Ch 2): http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~rjmh/Papers/arrows.pdf
They always go for the mathematical way of explaining stuff (this is not a compliment). Programmer English please, not Alien Math. (And that's me saying as someone who likes Alien math in general. But I just don't see the point in using it when programming).
Ok cool, your programming language now has two worlds, the functional world and the imperative world and they have two different syntaxes and you have to pass your world as an extra parameter and etc etc
And I personally find the syntactic sugar built on top of it confuses more than helps (ok, some of it is just Haskell being Haskell, but it confuses)
If you are comfortable giving some examples of that bad behavior and what it looked like I'd be happy to watch out for it and call anyone on that bad behavior so others don't have to experience it.