For instance, C#:

  public static System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<TResult> SelectMany<TSource,TCollection,TResult>(this System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<TSource> source, Func<TSource,System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<TCollection>> collectionSelector, Func<TSource,TCollection,TResult> resultSelector);

compared to:

  (>>=) :: m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b

Guess which one I googled, and which one I typed from memory.

In your c# sample full namespaces are unnecessary and will add only noise in this context.

Haskell have some syntactic sugar which makes monads nice to use, which is why monads are popular in Haskell.

Explaining monads in JavaScript or C# might show the mechanics but will not show why anyone would actually want to use them, since it just result in overly convoluted code.

I strongly disagree. Monads are used all the time in non-FP languages. Parser combinators are one common example. It's just a programming pattern which gives the benefits of global variables without the downsides. They work perfectly fine without dedicated syntax.

I was very confused about what they were until I saw an article similar to the one I linked, and then I realized that I had actually been using monads all along, I just didn't know they were called that. I think a lot of developers are in the same boat.

I dispute that monads are used “all the time” in non-FP languages. Can you provide some examples?