I find it difficult to understand why so many people use these upside-down, given how much weaker they are for their intended use in that orientation. And yet, it's apparently popular enough that @Genghis' model, and @ericsnis' model that it's based on, are themselves seemingly designed around that upside-down usage.
This remix “fixes” that for anyone, like me, who wants to use them in the normal orientation, as shown in the photo, where the blade is fully supported when pushed hard against a surface, and can't be easily knocked out of the head from the pushing force, and the thumb can rest in the recess to add leverage.
I did this in a couple of minutes with OrcaSlicer's built-in mesh modification and STL export features, so there's no CAD files, only the mesh based on the one @Genghis provided for the original model.
I tested printing it in both (flat) orientations with supports, and I found it much easier to get a sufficiently clean and flat result removing the supports out from the blade holder than from the thumb recess. Which works out, since it looks much nicer that way when it's done, too.
I personally find @UncleJessy's support removal model (I usually just use the smaller of the two) useful for determining the ideal surface offset for supports, if you're having trouble with cleanly removing supports in general. In my case, I often need to use the blank model and go lower than 0.20mm, which surprisingly is sometimes easier to remove, and provides better dimensional accuracy too.
Thanks to @Genghis and @ericsnis for generously sharing their work! Go check out theirs if you want to use these upside-down (and please feel free to let me know with a comment why you prefer that orientation, I'd genuinely like to understand better).
The author remixed this model.
Depending on how you look at it, I either flipped/rotated the head, or the handle, upside down relative to the other.