I sincerely disagree. Taking an author like Nietzsche and reducing to a few isolated "concept", this is rather detrimental. In fact, you will NOT be able to make sense in a satisfying way of Eternal Recurrence for a very long time, maybe ever. Even Slave-morality is something very confusing, if taken out of context, that is out of his work. Really, all if this matter very little in the vast enterprise of Nietzsche, who wrote at length about so many subjects and in so many forms.

Jumping in the text is the best. Being in contact with him and making yourself slowly more familiar with his ways, this is your goal. You barely need to remember any of the "conclusions" for now, because you aren’t able to understand how he came up with them anyway.

In that regard, I’m firmly against r/askPhilosophy, or even very established writers. I just watched a video with fucking Chomsky taking a crap on a concept because "you couldn’t find any arguments in the Stanford Philosophical Encyclopedia". Bug facepalm moment... As stated by Nietzsche and many others, philosophy isn’t for the one with a frog’s heart. Live up to it, do not try to cheat your way with "pure reason" (or whatever the fuck super abilities you think you might have). Living it, that means first and foremost accepting that you are merely a human, just like anyone else. This is why so many people would choose to read this invective as a "platitude"...