> How many Monad explanations need to be written before we admit that the Monad is an unsatisfactory abstraction for practical purposes? That's really not true

> How many Monad explanations need to be written before we admit that the Monad is an unsatisfactory abstraction for practical purposes? That's really not true, is it? I mean, you only need to look at how monads are used to express results as return types to understand the practical usefulness of monads.