In other communities, new tools and abstractions are generally "sold" by explaining how they are useful for solving specific problems. Not so in the Haskell com

In other communities, new tools and abstractions are generally "sold" by explaining how they are useful for solving specific problems. Not so in the Haskell community though. The Haskell community has a longstanding tradition of using condescending language ("fmap is from the street, fmap is hip to contexts."), and deliberate childrens-book style metaphors and illustrations in tutorials. The theory seem to be that if monads haven't been adopted by mainstream developers yet, it is just because the presentations haven't been dumbed-down and kiddie-friendly enough yet. (If only they from the onset had called "monads" for "warm fuzzy things" instead, surely developers would not be so scared of them!) The strategy have not yet borne fruit, though.