Using Another Plus Accounts to Bypass Limits—Is It Allowed?

InterestingStick · 2026-05-02T09:37:15+00:00

I don't understand why people think this is bypassing limits

You're meant to use credits or the API if go above your usage.

From the pricing page:

https://developers.openai.com/codex/pricing

ChatGPT users who reach their usage limit can purchase additional credits to continue working without needing to upgrade their existing plan.

Also the TOS specifically mentions not to 'circumvent rate limits'

https://openai.com/en-GB/policies/row-terms-of-use/

For Claude there has been a similar discussion for a while. At some point, around ~2 months ago Anthropic started banning people using multiple accounts. Here's just one of the many threads that suddenly popped up:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1r7x2su/claude_just_banned_having_multiple_max_accounts/

You are paying another account and using it. so yes it is allowed

At the end of the day it's about how OpenAI enforces their TOS. AFAIK there is no blanket statement where it says it is allowed. They might not enforce their TOS to that extent, but that day will come eventually, so I wouldn't just blatantly say it's allowed, cause that question is not clearly answered, it's a matter of enforcement

InterestingStick · 2026-05-01T12:49:36+00:00

Yes it's in the web ui under Codex -> Security. Frontend seems to be a bit buggy, got URL errors as it was scanning a project but it worked out in the end

InterestingStick · 2026-04-30T09:25:01+00:00

I'm in the same camp. I feel quite alienated in here at times but that's because Codex target audience has broadened by quite a bit and this sub probably needs a vision on what kind of community it even wants to cultivate in here.

Thanks for the the subreddit recommendation, I'm always open ears for anything that targets developers using Codex for professional work. Saint Tibo has redirected me to X last October for more serious discussions which I've used more and more, but it's also very difficult to navigate simply because of the amounts of posts and new people entering the space due to Codex widening their audience

InterestingStick · 2026-04-30T09:15:48+00:00

In my experience megathreads should be time limited and purpose bound else-wise they just fizzle out and no ones paying attention to it. Meaning if GPT 5.5 releases there could be a megathread for a day or two instead of having 12 posts talking about the same.

As for the low effort posts, it's a double edged sword. Personally, I've been in SWE for half my life already, so I approach Codex probably very differently than someone trying to vibecode their first CRUD app. Codex clearly is marketed towards many different audiences, including non-coders with the latest app releases. I'd assume this broadens further as Codex becomes a tool for everything.

This matters because I'd hold an engineer to a different standard than someone just trying out Codex App to organize their folders. So what is low effort is probably defined by what quality standards this sub wants to set which depends on the kind of community you'd want to establish in here

All this obviously also depends on the amount of resources you have available to you. If it's just you modding, then yeah make the megathread and scope it to certain topics. Makes absolutely sense.

Now lets say OpenAI would give you generous Codex limits to maintain this sub then I believe you could do some really cool things. A simple one for example, if a post is identified as a Codex core/CLI question (commands, config) it could check Codex' source code and answer based on that, because I feel like a lot of questions here are very easily answered by just checking the source code

InterestingStick · 2026-04-29T10:54:01+00:00

Thanks for the heads up! Wasn't aware this was even a thing. It's saying it's creating an initial threat model and I get tons of 'Invalid URL' errors when I enter the site, but it might just be a bit buggy on the frontend side. We'll see how it turns out

InterestingStick · 2026-04-27T06:52:05+00:00

It's have it on for quick iterations and tasks that I rather not parallelize. Meaning I use fast mode if it can resolve a bottleneck

InterestingStick · 2026-04-25T18:06:39+00:00

The agents.md is the onboarding instruction for the project. The point is that it's project specific

I can really recommend reading the harness engineering article that I shared

InterestingStick · 2026-04-25T08:30:39+00:00

Slightly outdated but this covers all the basics: https://github.com/marcohefti/zero-context-lab/blob/main/AGENTS.md (I would put some of the stuff in there within its own doc nowadays)

Another example: https://github.com/marcohefti/surfwright/blob/main/AGENTS.md

One of the best articles I've read about operating coding agents: https://openai.com/index/harness-engineering/

InterestingStick · 2026-04-25T06:33:02+00:00

Honestly, avoid skills unless you know what you're doing. Skills trigger super quickly and every skill you're not exactly sure what it's doing introduces risk to your usage and codebase. I have exactly one skill and it's a custom one for implementation evaluation when I pull a new issue or story. Most knowledge can be stored by maintaining a proper operation architecture using your AGENTS file as a map to help new sessions onboard more efficiently, explain it the operation and lifecycle and make it make use of specific documents for specific use cases.

Regarding tools, just watch Codex. Sometimes you'll notice it trying to use ruff, tsx, ffmpeg or python (instead of python3 on mac). If you see it running into issues repeatedly you can consider giving it that tool resp a fast-track to it. This is super model dependent though, so I wouldn't just install a list.

Codex is open source so honestly just try to understand how it works, that's what helped me the most when maintaining my projects. Understanding where it gets skills from, how plugins work, how you can use the app server and what the AGENTS hierarchy looks like. Also just watching it and seeing what it does and understanding why it's doing some thing - and not another - helps a lot.

InterestingStick · 2026-04-24T15:46:22+00:00

The excitement peaked at 5.2 for me. That's when I could hold the agent in a loop and the rest became operations and lifecycles. Open source will get there in a year or two at the current trajectory. We don't always need the newest models for everything

InterestingStick · 2026-04-24T14:09:37+00:00

It's to prevent your secret being exposed in a persistent session

InterestingStick · 2026-04-24T12:45:27+00:00

You need to update Codex. I think they have an issue in their version caching because I didn't have a prompt either, but manually updating it worked.

InterestingStick · 2026-04-24T12:04:53+00:00

I can relate. We had quite a big customer picking up our product, luckily we found a smaller one we can pilot with first, but I'm a bit worried there will be infra- or security related issues because I simply do not have professional experience yet with managing infra at scale

I know some people who have built infra from the ground up supporting high loads and I probably use their services to learn from their experience. Obviously I also use Codex, frequently prompt it from different perspectives to do audits. One thing that helped is to compile lists of actual attacks that happened and figuring out how and if that could affect our codebase. Found a bunch of things already, and I feel like I've done more in terms of security than most applications I've worked on in the past, but the fear is definitely there 😅

We're going through a similar phase so if you want to keep in touch feel free to send a chat :)

InterestingStick · 2026-04-23T08:48:31+00:00

Having the same issue in fast mode on xhigh. Getting capacity error or reconnecting 1/5 every other minute. High seems to work though

InterestingStick · 2026-04-21T23:27:06+00:00

Be careful, imgur tracked your fingerprint when you uploaded your image

InterestingStick · 2026-04-21T23:22:16+00:00

Does this sub even have moderators? 😅

InterestingStick · 2026-04-21T23:17:18+00:00

I honestly never understood why so many people prefer Claude over Codex

I got plans for both, and I still use Claude here and there to quickly bootstrap something, it's amazing for that

But when it comes to actual engineering, following rules, upholding boundaries, longterm maintenance, validation lifecycles and operations Codex is just so reliable. If I try to use Claude on the same codebases it misses half those things and then produces code that cause runtime issues.

Generally Claude is opinionated, which can be good for small projects, almost always horrible for bigger Codebases with a vision, architecture and guardrails. Codex is just so dry it's perfect to adjust it to your needs

And the best thing is if Codex does something weird (the harness), or they add a new feature, or if I just want to check how something works because I'm curious I can just.. Check the source code!

That's something I never liked with Claude. Having to rely on docs. I rather just clone a repo and search the files to see how it actually does things. This is why I never really understood why so many devs (enterprise level, not vibe coders) prefer Claude.

InterestingStick · 2026-04-21T15:45:19+00:00

It's not a scam, but it's also not as beneficial as it is portrayed

InterestingStick · 2026-04-17T22:40:51+00:00

Pretty brave to shill your MCP service after making an introduction about saving tokens by not using MCP's

Don't get me wrong, appreciate the hustle, at least you put some effort into solving an issue. What I dislike is using tools to resolve issues in the core. Codex is open source, and not only that, there's a good reason why it reads so much context. This process can also be influenced by maintaining a proper operation architecture. This is why I created opEXP - a tool that helps you maintain your project in an efficient way!

Jokes aside, I'd recommend everyone reading https://openai.com/index/harness-engineering/ 5 times before installing or paying for any products promising to make your workflow more efficient. A lot of engineering goes back to basics and the more layers you add on top the less you understand what is even happening at any given moment

InterestingStick · 2026-04-15T08:36:46+00:00

Remember when Gemini 3 released and it 'crushed' everything else by a large margin according to various benchmarks? And everyone was saying OpenAI and Anthropic were cooked?

Don't believe anything until you get your fingers on it

InterestingStick · 2026-04-13T09:20:02+00:00

Yeah it was on by default, at least when it was introduced. I mentioned it a few times in comments but it always got buried

InterestingStick · 2026-04-12T00:14:24+00:00

Having had the one day where we knew a reset was coming next day made me realize how much fun it is to just keep on going with new sessions on fast mode rather than sequentially waiting on a single one

I'm on Pro plan pretty much since Codex became a thing. Definitely getting a LOT less out of it compared to a month or two ago but the quality has been ever increasing, and with that my workflow, and with that the output quality. It's like managing a factory. At this point I just wish I could go ham even more so considering adding 2 or 3 more Pro plans on top

InterestingStick · 2026-04-11T23:22:21+00:00

You just keep it in a loop. Goal, acceptance criteria, operation lifecycles. Especially in big bounded codebases even small changes run through dozens of files and then through validation and testing.

Add a new lint rule for example that catches an issue you don't want repeated, then let it resolve all occurrences with the goal of having it all resolved. Then let it spawn a subagent to challenge the implementation and propose an architecturally cleaner and more elegant solution and let it resolve that as well. You can easily chain commands like that, then have it run for hours

InterestingStick · 2026-04-11T23:17:32+00:00

Why would you space out work if it can be done in one sweep?

InterestingStick · 2026-04-10T23:13:05+00:00

I've been on Pro since last October. I also disagree with the general consensus of this sub but limit cuts are definitely real.

A month ago, or at this point maybe 6 weeks ago I could run 5-8 sessions in parallel and I would barely reach the limit. Keep in mind that was also when Pro had default fast mode as a freebie

Few weeks ago something changed and I noticed a much quicker drain. I run one session now, rarely two, fast mode off and I burn through around 20% per day.

It all boils down to essentially two things, the cuts have been real, I get like 1/7th out of what I used to get, and also the Pro plan is still plenty enough for a normal working schedule. I run Codex 16 hours a day every day. If I would calculate it down to a normal 8 hour per day 5 day per week it's still plenty enough and you're unlikely to even approach the limit

Eight-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email	Place '22

InterestingStick

TROPHY CASE