I'm afraid I don't really remember much about this from so long ago, but I wonder now if some German entries may have been deleted that were actually better translations than the one remaining. Getting rid of 'obliegen' was probably fine, but don't we still need a few better things in its place?
In modern usage, in my experience, 'behoove' is often just a fancy way to say 'be a good idea,' 'be advisable,' etc. So, for example, if it would behoove you to do something, it would benefit you, would be wise for you, would be to your advantage to do it. It might also very well be fitting or proper for you to do it; that is, it might be advantageous for that reason.
In my experience, however, it doesn't really usually have much to do with obligation; it doesn't mean that it is necessary or required that you do it.
If that was my fault for not having been clear enough last time, I apologize. At this remove, I'm not sure what I was thinking when I used the word 'intransitive.' I think I meant anything intransitive in English looked archaic, but not necessarily anything intransitive in German (i.e., not get rid of the German reflexive verbs).
I realize the syntax doesn't quite match, because the English has a person as the object (direct object, therefore transitive), but the German is often an impersonal reflexive construction. So I'm not sure exactly how best to construct possible entries to include the person. Werner's original suggestion
to behoove so. to do sth. = jmdm. gut anstehen, etw. zu tun
might work, or maybe
to behoove so. to do sth. = sich schicken/gehören/geziemen für jdn., etw. zu tun
I'm sorry, I'm not really comfortable enough with any of these German verbs to feel sure exactly how they're used.
But in any case, it still seems to me that users need to find more than just 'erforderlich' when they enter the search term 'behoove.'