Regarding bullying, I've never been bullied on this site. With me, it's only gone as far as, "Hey, you shouldn't do that."
Or, "Hey, that causes harm to the equipment. Be careful."
I haven't bought or messed with magnetic Metal Halide ballasts, MV or HPS... yet. My bad moves regarded only fluorescent lighting.
In fact, if you go back to my 2011 days here on lighting gallery, you will quickly see all of my really stupid fluorescent tube experiments
that could've resulted in severe damage to my ballasts. 18 watt PL-L tube running on a magnetic F96T12 Slimline ballast...? Yeah. That was me.
Despite the bad moves, no one has ever bullied.

目前没什么大问题，我用过我的F90T17镇流器运行过F54T17，就是电流大得吓人，4A！

I don’t think that anybody says that a mismatched lamp and ballast will burn out instantly. I’ve even seen dead fluorescent lamps run on an hps ballast until they become so hot the glass softens and becomes conductive. They don’t usually explode instantly, unless you are running an 80w mercury at 3000w, like in a youtube video I saw once. That being said, I’m perfectly okay with experimenting with lamp and ballast combinations provided they are thought out so that there is no gross mismatch in characteristics. I’ve even run an F14T12 with a 60w incandescent as a ballast (it’s in my gallery) and a cheap ge 175w mercury lamp on a 100w ballast for a short while. I would be more concerned about the longevity of the ballast (or the lamp) if it was a semi-permanent setup. One thing I’m not okay with is people experimenting with rare lamps, where the experiment could shorten the lifespan of the lamp or cause irreparable harm.  If the lamp is readily available, I have no problem. On the other hand, experimenting with a power groove lamp when a regular vho is electrically the same is wrong in my opinion, since one can perform the same experiment in a different way without risking a rare lamp. Of course, for reasons of practicality, if one wants to run a lamp like an H85A3, or a linear sox lamp, without the right ballast, the risk has to be taken. In that case, tread with caution. In cases where one can use a modern lamp to test a setup first, there’s no sense risking a vintage one until the validity of the setup is proven.

Of course, that’s just my opinion. I’m cautious with anything rare or collectable, and I have a hard time using a vintage lamp unless I have at least one other to keep pristine for the collection, notwithstanding lamps that were already used, where I don’t care if I use it, even if I only have one.

I don’t think that anybody says that a mismatched lamp and ballast will burn out instantly. I’ve even seen dead fluorescent lamps run on an hps ballast until they become so hot the glass softens and becomes conductive. They don’t usually explode instantly, unless you are running an 80w mercury at 3000w, like in a youtube video I saw once. That being said, I’m perfectly okay with experimenting with lamp and ballast combinations provided they are thought out so that there is no gross mismatch in characteristics. I’ve even run an F14T12 with a 60w incandescent as a ballast (it’s in my gallery) and a cheap ge 175w mercury lamp on a 100w ballast for a short while. I would be more concerned about the longevity of the ballast (or the lamp) if it was a semi-permanent setup. One thing I’m not okay with is people experimenting with rare lamps, where the experiment could shorten the lifespan of the lamp or cause irreparable harm.  If the lamp is readily available, I have no problem. On the other hand, experimenting with a power groove lamp when a regular vho is electrically the same is wrong in my opinion, since one can perform the same experiment in a different way without risking a rare lamp. Of course, for reasons of practicality, if one wants to run a lamp like an H85A3, or a linear sox lamp, without the right ballast, the risk has to be taken. In that case, tread with caution. In cases where one can use a modern lamp to test a setup first, there’s no sense risking a vintage one until the validity of the setup is proven.

Of course, that’s just my opinion. I’m cautious with anything rare or collectable, and I have a hard time using a vintage lamp unless I have at least one other to keep pristine for the collection, notwithstanding lamps that were already used, where I don’t care if I use it, even if I only have one.

By the way, not all low pressure sodium lamps are “SOX lamps”, there is no such thing as a “linear SOX lamp”. Those lamps that you are referring to are known as SLI/H lamps and there are other low pressure sodium lamps that are NOT SOX lamps such as SO/H, SOI/H, NA-9, etc. From what I understand, SOX lamps are just the most common low pressure sodium lamps out there worldwide. I personally have SOX lamps and an SLI/H lamp in my collection.

By the way, not all low pressure sodium lamps are “SOX lamps”, there is no such thing as a “linear SOX lamp”. Those lamps that you are referring to are known as SLI/H lamps and there are other low pressure sodium lamps that are NOT SOX lamps such as SO/H, SOI/H, NA-9, etc. From what I understand, SOX lamps are just the most common low pressure sodium lamps out there worldwide. I personally have SOX lamps and an SLI/H lamp in my collection.

I’m aware of the nuances of the different types of sodium lamps. I’m just lazy and I didn’t feel like writing sli/h, since I was typing on my phone, and doing so would require me to explain that it is another type of sodium lamp. For most people, it’s easier to call it a sox lamp, even if it is incorrect. While I personally would refrain from doing this where it would be extremely incorrect, such as with lamps with a dewar jacket, or the lamps made similarly to modern ones, being one piece, but lacking the indium tin oxide coating, I did not consider it as bad for SLI/H lamps. Since SLI/H lamps share many similarities, including the infrared reflective coating, I didn’t consider it an excessive misrepresentation, even if SLI lamps have a different arc tube geometry and other differences.

It's probably easier in these circumstances to just say LPS, which obviously applies to all low pressure sodium lamps.

I've said it before but I simply think that lamps/tubes should be run on their specified ballasts only and vice versa. But that's the electrician side of me talking and in no way intended to be bullying.

I've said it before but I simply think that lamps/tubes should be run on their specified ballasts only and vice versa. But that's the electrician side of me talking and in no way intended to be bullying.

I agree 100%, and it's what I try to do unless the ballast in question is virtually unobtainable, such as the correct one for a 200W SLI/H. It's why we bought a 120V 60Hz inverter, after all, and spent money on getting US ballasts from the States. But if people want to experiment, it's their right to do so, with their own lamps. But the purist in me wishes they wouldn't.

I agree 100%, and it's what I try to do unless the ballast in question is virtually unobtainable, such as the correct one for a 200W SLI/H. It's why we bought a 120V 60Hz inverter, after all, and spent money on getting US ballasts from the States. But if people want to experiment, it's their right to do so, with their own lamps. But the purist in me wishes they wouldn't.

I try to do that same too with the exception of ballasts for 100w and lower MV as they're getting harder to find. 175w and up MV I'll just use a MH ballast which were rated for MV anyway before the bans required them to remove the MV rating.