It’s confusing if you add a card to the “And” section of a flow if the card says [Device] “is turned on”. That implies [in English] that the And criterion is a device is switched from the off state to the on state, not that the device is already on. That would be a second trigger
It would be less confusing [and better English] to have the card say
[Device] “is on” or
[Device] “is already on” or (for split infinitive pedants),
[Device] “is on already”
Who cares? If it’s turned on, you don’t have to turn it on again. And when a device is turned on, it’s not a garantee that it is on, only for Homey the status is on.
I care. And so should developers.
It’s confusing enough as it is to get flows to work they way you think they should, let alone be hindered with poor semantics / mis-translations.
As written, its wrong. It is written as one time event, when in fact it should be written as a status.
It’s a significantly different scenario to say…
“When this trigger happens AND this trigger happens [at the same time]”, than to say…
“When this trigger happens and the status of a device is this”
You are Dutch, so if I translate it to “Wordt aangezet” you probably understand the situation a bit better. The intricacies of the English language are a lot less apparent in Dutch, so I deliberately chose the wording to show the conflict. “Is aangezet” is the easiest Dutch translation, but that is used in multiple ways. For us that could have happened a while back, in English it could not.
Now just hope my English is correct. I am Dutch too, so forgive me if I messed up. 
